solomon ecosystem and socio- economic resilience islands ... · solomon islands esram: volume 1...

SOLOMONISLANDS

Ecosystem and Socio- economic Resilience

Analysis and Mapping

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment i

SPREP Library Cataloguing-in-Publica�oa on Data Solomon Islands Ecosystem and Socio-Economic Resilience Analysis and Mapping (ESRAM), Volume 1 : Introduction and national assessment. Apia, Samoa: SPREP, 2018. 141 p. 29 cm. ISBN: 978-982-04-0757-2 (print) 978-982-04-0758-9 (ecopy) 1. Ecosystem management – Solomon Islands. 2. Nature conservation. 3. Climatic changes – Adaptation. 4. Biodiversity conservation – Economic aspects. 5. Biodiversity conservation – Social aspects. 6. Environmental impact analysis. I. Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP). II. Title 333.72’9593 Copyright © Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), 2017. Reproduction for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided that the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written consent of the copyright owner. Cover photo: Stuart Chape

Our vision: The Pacific environment, sustaining our livelihoods and natural heritage in harmony with our cultures.

This report produced by BMT WBM for the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) presents Volume 1

(of three volumes) prepared as part of the Solomon Islands Ecosystems and Socio-economic Resilience Analysis and Mapping (ESRAM)

to assess and prioritise climate change-related ecosystem-based adapation options for selected locations in Solomon Islands. Volume

1 provides the generic project background and methodology relevant to all three volumes, together with the high level national scale

assessment.

Authors: Beth Toki, Lyn Leger, Suanne Richards, Sophie Hipkin, Joseph Lorimer (Aither), Rod Coulton (Aither).

All photographs are credited to Beth Toki unless stated otherwise.

Key project partners

PO Box 240, Apia, Samoa [email protected], www.sprep.org

Project coordination: Fred Patison.

mailto:[email protected]

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment ii

Contents

List of Abbreviations viii

Acknowledgements ix

Executive Summary x

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Pacific Ecosystem-Based Adaptation to Climate Change Project 1

1.1.1 Background 1

1.1.2 Study components and outputs 1

1.2 Aims and objectives 2

1.3 Volume 1 report scope 3

1.4 Ecosystem services context 4

2 ESRAM methodology 9

2.1 Study approach 9

2.2 Ecosystem baseline and threats assessment 9

2.2.1 Review of existing literature 9

2.2.2 Stakeholder workshops 11

2.2.3 Mapping 12

2.3 Economic valuations 13

2.3.1 Economic approach 13

2.3.2 Step 1: Filter and sort ecosystem services 14

2.3.3 Step 2: Establish ecosystem unit values 15

2.3.4 Step 3: Calculate ecosystem service values 15

2.4 Climate change assessment 16

2.4.1 Current and future climate projections 16

2.4.2 Climate change vulnerability assessment 19

2.5 ESRAM study outcomes 20

3 National scale ESRAM – context 21

3.1 Specific methodology 21

3.1.1 Grouping of ecosystem services for valuation 22

3.2 Geographic setting 25

3.3 National socio-economic profile 25

3.4 Biodiversity and conservation 26

3.5 National governance 33

3.5.1 Climate change governance 36

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment iii

4 Current state, trends, drivers of change and environmental consequences 39

4.1 Current state of ecosystems and national trends 39

4.1.1 Forests 40

4.1.1.1 Forest types 40

4.1.2 Freshwater ecosystems 43

4.1.3 Coral reefs 43

4.1.4 Mangroves 44

4.1.5 Seagrass 45

4.1.6 Ocean health 45

4.2 Drivers of change 45

4.2.1 Population pressures 45

4.2.2 Subsistence use intensification 46

4.2.3 Commercial plantations 47

4.2.4 Urbanisation 47

4.2.5 Mining 47

4.2.6 Logging 48

4.2.7 Fishing and marine exports 49

4.2.8 Pollution 49

4.2.9 Energy production and use 50

4.3 Environmental consequences 50

4.3.1 Freshwater stress 50

4.3.2 Soil stress and degradation 51

4.3.3 Forest depletion 51

4.3.4 Loss of biodiversity 52

4.3.5 Fish stock depletion and coral reef degradation 52

5 National ecosystems and ecosystem services 54

5.1 National overview 54

5.2 Key ecosystems and ecosystem services 55

5.3 Rivers and streams 60

5.4 Wetlands, lakes and swamps 61

5.5 Terrestrial forests / vegetation 62

5.6 Mountains (highlands / cloud forests) 64

5.7 Other terrestrial land 65

5.8 Coral reefs 66

5.9 Seagrass / marine flora 70

5.10 Coastline / beaches 72

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment iv

5.11 Mangroves 73

5.12 Sea / Ocean 74

5.13 Groundwater 81

5.14 Cultivated land (gardens and plantations) 81

5.15 Summary of human induced threats to ecosystem services 82

6 National ecosystem valuations 88

6.1 Economic values for ecosystem services 88

7 Climate change vulnerability assessment 90

7.1 Current climate 90

7.1.1.1 Air temperature 90

7.1.1.2 Rainfall 90

7.1.1.3 Wind-driven waves 91

7.1.1.4 Tropical cyclones 91

7.1.1.5 Sea level 91

7.1.1.6 Ocean acidification 91

7.2 Future climate projections 91

7.2.1.1 Average temperature 92

7.2.1.2 Extreme temperature 92

7.2.1.3 Average rainfall 92

7.2.1.4 Extreme rainfall 92

7.2.1.5 Drought 92

7.2.1.6 Cyclones 92

7.2.1.7 Wind-driven waves 93

7.2.1.8 Sea level 93

7.2.1.9 Ocean acidification 93

7.2.1.10 Coral bleaching risk 93

7.3 Climate change threats 94

7.3.1 Temperature increase 94

7.3.2 Sea-level rise 95

7.3.3 Ocean acidification 95

7.3.4 More extreme rain events 96

7.3.5 Summary of climate change threats 96

7.4 Vulnerability of ecosystem services to climate change variables 97

7.4.1 Sea-level rise 97

7.4.2 Air and sea temperature 98

7.4.3 Ocean acidification 99

7.4.4 Extreme rainfall events 99

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment v

7.4.5 Summary of ecosystem service vulnerability to climate change 100

8 ESRAM outcomes 103

8.1 Resilience of ecosystem services to human induced and climate change effects 103

8.1.1 Freshwater ecosystems and services 103

8.1.2 Coastal and marine ecosystems and services 104

8.1.3 Terrestrial ecosystems and services 106

8.2 National ecosystem based adaptation options 107

Glossary 111

9 References and Bibliography 112

9.1 References 112

9.2 Bibliography 116

Appendix A National workshop attendees A-1

Appendix B Climate projections B-1

Appendix C National vulnerability assessment results C-1

List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Position of ESRAM study in the broader PEBACC process 2

Figure 1-2 Locality map 4

Figure 2-1 Categories for total economic valuation 13

Figure 2-2 Overarching methodology for economic valuations 14

Figure 2-3 Ecosystems and their services for the Solomon Islands 18

Figure 2-4 Climate change vulnerability assessment conceptual framework 19

Figure 3-1 Stakeholders at the national workshop conducting participatory activities in groups (photographs courtesy of Simon Albert) 24

Figure 3-2 Managed areas in Solomon Islands (image courtesy of MACBIO) 29

Figure 3-3 Example of ridge-to-reef benefits (SPREP 2014) 30

Figure 3-4 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) (image courtesy MACBIO) 31

Figure 3-5 Important bird areas (IBAs) (image courtesy MACBIO) 32

Figure 3-6 Institutional arrangements for the implementation of the National Climate Change Policy (Source: Rodil and Mias-Cea 2014) 37

Figure 4-1 Projected population estimates for Solomon Islands (2.07% annual growth rate) 46

Figure 4-2 Projected forest clearing rates for Solomon Islands 52

Figure 5-1 Mangroves, seagrass and reefs 68

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment vi

Figure 5-2 Solomon Islands marine species richness (courtesy MACBIO) 69

Figure 5-3 Seaweed production sites (from Kronen 2010) 71

Figure 5-4 Fishing access area boundaries 77

Figure 5-5 Ocean productivity (courtesy MACBIO) 78

Figure 5-6 Artisanal fishing intensity (courtesy MACBIO) 79

Figure 5-7 Tuna catch in Solomon Islands, 2001–2010 (courtesy MACBIO) 80

Figure B-1 Projected emissions of greenhouse gases for the range of RCP trajectories. Radiative forcings for each trajectory shown (bottom right). (van Vuuren et.al. 2011). B-1

Figure B-2 The main climate features in the western tropical Pacific region (source: BOM and CSIRO 2012) B-2

List of Tables

Table 1-1 Summary of ecosystem services’ contribution to human resilience outcomes (Carabine 2015) 7

Table 2-1 Study tasks 9

Table 2-2 Overview of stakeholder participation and field approaches 11

Table 3-1 Summary of stakeholder workshop attendees, 9 August 2016 22

Table 3-2 National governance framework (SPREP 2016) 33

Table 4-1 Summary of current state of ecosystems and native species in Solomon Islands (SPREP 2016) 39

Table 4-2 Area coverage of forest types per province (Source: MFEC 1995) 42

Table 4-3 Change in forest cover over time in Solomon Islands (SPREP 2016) 43

Table 4-4 Change in mangrove forest in Solomon Islands (FAO 2010) 44

Table 4-5 Annual summary of log export production by province (Source: Pauku 2009) 49

Table 5-1 Examples of typical community reliance on local ecosystem resources 54

Table 5-2 Key ecosystems and ecosystem services identified for Solomon Islands 57

Table 5-3 Summary of ecosystem sources for key ecosystem services 59

Table 5-4 Fishing access arrangements (as per Solomon Islands Tuna Management and Development Plan) 76

Table 5-5 Production value of key crops, 2009 (adapted from Rodil and Mias-Crea 2014) 82

Table 5-6 Summary of key threats to each ecosystem service 84

Table 6-1 Summary of national ecosystem service values (adapted from MACBIO 2015) 88

Table 6-2 Summary of national ecosystem service values (adapted from de Groot et al. 2012) 89

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment vii

Table 7-1 Climate variables and the high to very highly vulnerable ecosystem services at the national scale 101

Table 8-1 Suggested EbA options to increase the adaptive capacity and resilience of Solomon Island ecosystems 108

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment viii

List of Abbreviations

ACMCA Anarvon Community Marine Conservation Area

AR5 Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC

CBRM community-based resource management

EbA ecosystem-based adaptation

EBA endemic bird area

EBSA ecologically and biologically significant areas

EEZ exclusive economic zone

ENSO El Niño-Southern Oscillation

ESRAM Ecosystem and Socio-economic Resilience Analysis and Mapping

EVRI Environmental Valuation Reference Inventory

GCM Global Climate Model

GIS Global Information Systems

GPS Global Positioning System

IBA important bird areas

KBA key biodiversity areas

MHWM mean high water mark

MPA marine protected area

NM nautical miles

PEBACC Pacific Ecosystem-based Adaptation to Climate Change

PV present value

R2R ridge-to-reef

RCP Representative Concentration Pathway

SPC The Pacific Community

SOPAC Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission (now the Geoscience Division) of SPC

SPREP Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme

TBL triple Bottom Line

TEV total economic valuation

TNC The Nature Conservancy

UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

VandA vulnerability and adaptation

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment ix

Acknowledgements

With assistance from SPREP, this and the subsequent volumes (Volumes 2 and 3) are the result of a

collaboration between BMT WBM, our subconsultants, and the numerous community, government and other

stakeholder representatives who have been involved in the project to date.

Key project team personnel involved in the ESRAM process include:

Dr Beth Toki (BMT WBM)

Janice Booth (BMT WBM)

Dr Simon Albert (University of Queensland)

Rod Coulton (Aither)

Joseph Lorimer (Aither)

David Boseto (Ecological Solutions Solomon Islands)

Dr Tammy Tabe

Donald Kudu

Lyn Leger (BMT WBM)

Sophie Hipkin (BMT WBM)

Suanne Richards (BMT WBM)

On behalf of SPREP, BMT WBM also recognise the generosity of the German Federal Ministry of the

Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) as the donors sponsoring this work.

For this volume, in particular, we also thank the many people, ministries, non-governmental organisations and

other sources who contributed by making available the reports and data used or referred to herein, as well as

the stakeholder representatives who participated in the National ESRAM workshop (refer herein).

Fred Patison and Herman Timmermans from SPREP provided constructive feedback and suggested

improvements on the draft report, with Fred also providing valuable in-country assistance and data. Additional

acknowledgements specific to Honiara and Wagina Island are detailed in the respective volumes.

Special acknowledgment to the late Tia Masolo (d. September 2016) – Deputy Director of the Environment

and Conservation Division, MECDM. Mr Masolo participated in the national ESRAM workshop and

accompanied SPREP’s PEBACC team to Wagina Island in preparation for the commencement of the Wagina

Island ESRAM.

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment x

Executive Summary

Project overview

This project forms part of the Solomon Islands component of the Pacific Ecosystem-based Adaptation to

Climate Change (PEBACC) project. PEBACC is a five-year project funded by the German Government. It is

implemented by the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) in three participating

countries (Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu) to explore and promote ecosystem-based options for adapting

to climate change. The key outputs of the PEBACC project are:

(1) ecosystem and socio-economic resilience analysis and mapping (ESRAM) study – baseline study for

adaptation planning at national, provincial and community levels;

(2) ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) options assessment – EbA options analysed, prioritised and plans

developed;

(3) implementation plans – EbA plans implemented with demonstrated benefits; and

(4) communications and outreach products developed to promote integration of EbA options into climate

change policies, plans and projects.

The ESRAM component (Output 1) study is the subject of the present report. The ESRAM study will inform

subsequent EbA phases of the PEBACC project involving the identification of EbA options for strengthening

the resilience of Solomon Islands to the effects of climate change. The following framework was used to

undertake the ESRAM study.

Task 1 Ecosystem baseline and threat assessment

Identify the current state of ecosystems, trends and drivers of change with root causes, scenarios,

governance factors.

Identify ecosystem types, ecosystem services and threats.

Identify ecosystem services that are valued by the community.

Map key ecosystems and related ecosystem services, including high-use areas and/or major threats based

on existing spatial data.

Task 2 Ecosystem valuation

Undertake a ‘total economic valuation’ to define the economic value of key ecosystems services relevant

to the ESRAM study.

Task 3 Condition and threat analysis

Assess the vulnerability of ecosystems services to the effects of climate change based on climate change

projections.

Identify the ecosystem services most vulnerable to future climate and non-climate threats and effects.

Recommend EbA options to strengthen the resilience of key ecosystem services.

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment xi

While ESRAM considers three geographic locations/scales, this Volume 1 report is the national scale

assessment. This is a broader (higher-level) exercise than the local and city scale assessments, as appropriate

to this spatial scale. Volume 1 presents:

(1) general ESRAM methodology – a description of the general ESRAM assessment approach used for the

three scales/locations in Solomon Islands; and

(2) national ESRAM – the results of the national scale ESRAM assessment.

The results of the Wagina Island and Honiara ESRAM assessments are presented in Volumes 2 and 3,

respectively.

National ESRAM outcomes

Well-managed and healthy ecosystems are critical for the provision of essential services to maintain the health,

well-being and livelihoods of all Solomon Island communities and economies. The vulnerability of social and

ecological systems to human activities, such as logging, agriculture, pollution and the over-exploitation of

marine resources throughout Solomon Islands, is increasing. As one of the fastest growing populations in the

world, these activities will only intensify and have an increased detrimental effect on the communities and

economies of Solomon Islands. The direct and indirect effects of climate change and their interactions with

human-induced threats increases the vulnerability of critical ecosystem services and reduces the resilience of

social and ecological systems.

Freshwater ecosystem services

Freshwater ecosystems provide essential services to many Solomon Island households. The key

anthropogenic threats to freshwater ecosystems are an increase in sedimentation of stream and river systems

from logging and land-clearing practices, pollution of water catchments from inappropriate solid waste and

sanitation practices, rapid population growth, and urbanisation. The key climate threats to freshwater

ecosystem services are an increase in extreme rainfall events and sea-level rise. The key ecosystem services

most vulnerable and in need of protection, restoration and enhancement to build their resilience under future

climate conditions are:

provision of water supply (for drinking, domestic and irrigation purposes) provided by groundwater, rivers,

streams and lakes;

provision of food for both subsistence and commercial purposes (eels and other fish, molluscs, crustaceans,

etc.) provided by rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands and swamps;

habitat provision (supporting biodiversity and food sources) provided by streams, rivers, wetlands, lakes

and swamps;

income generation (fisheries, aquaculture and bottled water) provided by streams, rivers, wetlands, lakes

and groundwater;

provision of recreational activities (swimming) provided by streams and rivers; and

water purification by wetlands, lakes and swamps.

The high reliance on freshwater resources for many households, particularly low-income households,

combined with the reduced water quality and a rapid population growth rate, are critical issues for building the

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment xii

nation’s resilience to future climate change effects. If effective measures are not implemented to conserve

freshwater resources and improve water quality issues, households that solely rely on freshwater ecosystems

services for their health and well-being and livelihoods (e.g. food and water supply), will need to adapt to

alternative means to strengthen their resilience to the future effects of climate change. If not managed

effectively, the potential economic loss of freshwater ecosystems (e.g. freshwater lakes, rivers, wetlands) is

estimated at USD 15,512 (2015) or SBD 121,282 (2015) per hectare per annum.

Coastal and marine ecosystems and services

Increasing habitat destruction, pollution and over-exploitation of marine resources for both subsistence and

commercial use has resulted in severe decline of marine biodiversity and ocean health, and the depletion of

important food and commercial species. The rapidly increasing population and inadequate environmental

regulations are intensifying the rate of marine ecosystem degradation. The climate change projections likely

to have the greatest effect on marine and coastal ecosystem services are an increase in sea and air

temperatures and associated ocean acidification and coral bleaching, an increase in extreme rainfall events

and sea-level rise. The key ecosystem services most vulnerable and in need of protection, restoration and

enhancement to ensure resilience under future climate conditions are:

provision of food (supplying daily protein and micronutrients through fish, including pelagic fish, turtles,

octopus, clams, beche-de-mer, trochus, molluscs and crustaceans) provided by coral reefs, mangroves,

marine waters, seagrass and macroalgae (seaweed);

supporting habitat (essential feeding, breeding, spawning, cleaning and aggregation habitat) and

biodiversity provided by coral reefs, mangroves, beaches, marine waters, seagrass and macroalgae;

income and revenue generation (fishing, seaweed, coral, lime extraction and tourism) provided by coral

reefs, marine waters and macroalgae;

provision of raw materials (timber, fuelwood, coral rock and lime production) provided by mangroves and

coral reefs;

hazard protection, including wave attenuation by coral reefs, seabed stabilisation by marine macroalgae,

and shoreline and coastal protection by mangroves;

cultural practices, values and identity (shell money, ornaments and decorations) provided by seagrass,

macroalgae and coral reefs;

provision of kastom medicine provided by seagrass and mangroves; and

regulating services (carbon sequestration, climate and atmospheric regulation, primary production, etc.)

provided by mangroves, marine waters, coral reefs, beaches, seagrass and marine macroalgae.

Marine and coastal ecosystem services are central to the livelihoods and well-being of a large portion of

Solomon Island communities and economies. Marine and coastal ecosystem resilience needs to be enhanced

by improving water quality, reducing coastal development pressures and sustainably managing fisheries

resources. A balance between meeting the subsistence food needs of households and maximising economic

benefits through export and sales of marine products is needed to build social and economic resilience.

The potential economic loss of marine and coastal ecosystems and all ecosystem services (e.g. coral reefs,

coastal systems, and coastal wetlands, including mangroves) is estimated to cost USD 295,052 (2015) or SBD

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment xiii

2,306,888 (2015) per hectare per annum. Utilising the estimated total coverage of mangroves in Solomon

Islands of 65,000 ha (Sulu et al. 2012), the loss of mangroves and their ecosystem services is equivalent to

an economic loss of USD 579,345,000 (2015) or SBD 4,529,395,000 (2015). Based on the estimated seagrass

cover of 10,000 ha (Sulu et al. 2012) throughout Solomon Islands, the loss of ecosystems services provided

by seagrass would equate to a loss of approximately USD 296,700,000 (2015) and SBD 2,319,750,000 (2015).

Terrestrial ecosystems and services

Logging and agricultural activities, coupled with a rapid population growth, are the key threats faced by the

nation’s terrestrial ecosystem services, while threats from mining and infrastructure activities are likely to

increase in the future. The climate change projections likely to have the greatest impact on terrestrial

ecosystem services are an increase in extreme rainfall events and an increase in air temperature. The

increased vulnerability of terrestrial ecosystems may be expressed by a reduction in local biodiversity and

species structure, and sensitivity to other threats, such as pest and disease and prolonged dry periods. The

key ecosystem services most vulnerable and in need of protection, restoration and enhancement to ensure

resilience under future climate conditions are:

provision of food provided by terrestrial forests, plantations and gardens;

provision of water supply, produced by forests and mountains and supported by vegetation, soils and

microorganisms;

supporting habitat and biodiversity by terrestrial forests;

provision of raw materials and income generation (building, fuel and commercial purposes);

erosion control and land stability;

protection from natural hazards and extreme weather events provided by terrestrial forests;

cultural services such as cultural items, values, practices, identity and heritage (traditional tools, ornaments,

costumes, weaving, handicrafts and traditional currency); and

regulating services (regulation of water supply and quality, primary productivity, nutrient cycling, soil fertility

and stability, and carbon sequestration) provided by terrestrial forests.

The clearing of forests will continue to reduce the resilience of social and ecosystem systems by reducing the

provision of essential ecosystem services. Forest degradation, clearing and change in land use reduces the

resilience of both humans and ecosystems to future climate and non-climate threats. As the frequency and

intensity of climate-related disasters increase with global climate change (Munang et al. 2013), the resilience

of ecosystems and human societies against the effects of climate change will continue to decrease with further

environmental degradation.

The potential economic loss of terrestrial ecosystems (e.g. tropical forests and grasslands) and their

ecosystems is estimated to cost USD 4,675 (2015) or SBD 36,553 (2015) per hectare per annum. Based on

the estimated forest cover of 2,150,000 ha in 2015, this would equate to a loss of approximately USD

6,884,300,000 (2015) and SBD 53,829,550,000 (2015).

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment xiv

Ecosystem-based adaptation options

Through sustainable resource management, ecosystem-based adaptation integrates biodiversity and

ecosystem services into an adaptation strategy. It is envisioned that EbA will be incorporated and implemented

in both policy and on-ground adaptation actions, providing a test case and model for other Pacific nations (or

other scales/locations within the participating countries). An ecosystem-based adaptation approach is

particularly relevant to the economies and communities of the Pacific Islands, which are heavily reliant on local

land and sea resources for maintaining national, provincial and local economies and community livelihoods

and socio-cultural values. In this respect, maintaining healthy and well-functioning ecosystems will be crucial

to building community resilience and reducing vulnerability to the effects of climate change.

By highlighting ecosystem service vulnerabilities, opportunities can be identified to protect and restore critical

ecosystems and their services, and retain and build on the strengths of social systems and effective

governance structures. Based on the vulnerable ecosystem services identified, high level EbA options have

been proposed to protect, restore and strengthen ecosystems to increase the resilience of Solomon Island

social and ecological systems.

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Pacific Ecosystem-Based Adaptation to Climate Change Project

1.1.1 Background

This project forms part of the Solomon Islands component of the Pacific Ecosystem-based

Adaptation to Climate Change (PEBACC) project. PEBACC is a five-year project, funded by the

German Government. It is implemented by the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment

Programme (SPREP) in three participating countries (Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu) to explore

and promote ecosystem-based options for adapting to climate change.

Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) is an ecosystem-focussed approach to building the resilience of

linked social and ecological systems to the negative effects of climate change. Through sustainable

resource management, ecosystem-based adaptation integrates biodiversity and ecosystem services

into an adaptation strategy. When delivered effectively, EbA can be cost-effective and contribute to

biodiversity conservation, while generating social, economic and cultural co-benefits (CBD 2009).

An ecosystem-based adaptation approach is particularly relevant to the economies and communities

of the Pacific Islands, which are heavily reliant on local land and sea resources for maintaining

national, provincial and local economies and community livelihoods and socio-cultural values. In this

respect, maintaining healthy and well-functioning ecosystems will be crucial to building community

resilience and reducing vulnerability to the effects of climate change.

1.1.2 Study components and outputs

Figure 1-1 shows the key components of the PEBACC project, which are:

(1) ecosystem and socio-economic resilience analysis and mapping (ESRAM) study – baseline

study for adaptation planning at national, provincial and community levels;

(2) EbA options assessment – EbA options analysed, prioritised and plans developed;

(3) implementation plans – EbA plans implemented with demonstrated benefits; and

(4) communications and outreach products developed to promote integration of EbA options into

climate change policies, plans and projects

(SPREP 2016).

The ESRAM component (Step 1) study is the subject of the present report. The ESRAM study will

inform subsequent EbA phases of the PEBACC project, involving the identification of ecosystem‐

based adaptation options for strengthening the resilience of Solomon Islands to the effects of climate

change. It is envisioned that EbA will be incorporated and implemented in both policy and on-ground

adaptation actions, providing a test case and model for other Pacific nations (or other

scales/locations within the participating countries). Both the EbA options assessments and

implementation plans will be presented as stand-alone reports separate to this ESRAM study.

The ESRAM study will be followed by: a detailed EbA options assessment (step 2); the development

of implementation plans for selected demonstration sites (step 3); and on-ground EbA

implementation works (step 4) (see Figure 1-1). Both the EbA options assessments and


implementation plans will be presented as stand-alone reports, separate from the ESRAM reports

(i.e. Volumes 1, 2 and 3).

Figure 1-1 Position of ESRAM study in the broader PEBACC process

1.2 Aims and objectives

The aim of the ESRAM study was to provide a baseline overview of ecosystems and ecosystem

services, at relevant spatial scales, to inform subsequent EbA phases of the PEBACC project

involving the identification of ecosystem‐based adaptation options for strengthening the resilience of

Solomon Islands to the effects of climate change.

The species objectives of the ESRAM study are listed below.

1. Identify ecosystem types, ecosystem services and threats in the context of:

○ ecosystem types present, in the context of the relevant ecosystem services;

○ the present condition or health of the ecosystems, based on existing information if available

and/or recent observations (qualitative or opportunistic) throughout the course of the

assessment;

○ key ecosystem services in terms of direct community dependencies;

○ the role of ecosystem services in providing socio-ecological resilience;

○ critical ecosystem linkages or dependencies; and

○ the main existing threats to an ecosystem and/or ecosystem service.

2. Map key ecosystems and related ecosystem services, including high-use areas and/or major

threats based on existing spatial data.


3. Identify the current state of ecosystems, trends and drivers of change with root causes,

scenarios and governance factors.

4. Undertake a ‘total economic valuation’ to define the economic value of key ecosystems

services relevant to ESRAM.

5. Assess the vulnerability of ecosystems services to the effects of climate change, based on

climate change projections and other existing threats.

6. Provide broad recommendations regarding strategic EbA options.

This ESRAM study (and its counterparts in Vanuatu and Fiji) represent the first time that such

extensive and broad-scale assessments have been undertaken to guide EbA implementation in the

Pacific region. An additional objective of the ESRAM studies is therefore to provide a case study for

future knowledge-sharing and developments in the application of EbA elsewhere.

1.3 Volume 1 report scope

While ESRAM considers three geographic locations/scales, this Volume 1 report is the national scale

assessment. It is a broader (higher-level) exercise than the local and city scale assessments, as

appropriate to this spatial scale.

Volume 1 presents:

general ESRAM methodology – A description of the general ESRAM assessment approach used

for the three scales/locations in Solomon Islands; and

national ESRAM – The results of the national scale ESRAM assessment.

The results of the Wagina Island and Honiara ESRAM assessments are presented in Volumes 2 and

3 respectively.


Figure 1-2 Locality map

1.4 Ecosystem services context

There is an urgent need for Solomon Islands and other small island nations to strengthen their

resilience to the effects of climate change. As part of this process, it is important to focus on the

opportunities and resilience provided by protecting and restoring ecosystem services that underpin

national development agendas and community livelihoods.

Ecosystem services are the benefits, or services, that people obtain from ecosystems to sustain and

support human well-being (Travers et al. 2012; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005).

Ecosystems provide a diverse range of services for communities and economies across the globe.

As the demand for these services increases through global drivers such as population growth,

urbanisation, increased consumption and increased global connections (Biggs et al. 2012),

ecosystems are under increasing stress to continue to provide the services humanity depends upon.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) categorises ecosystem services into four types (see

Table 1-1 for further examples of ecosystem services):

provisioning services – the products obtained directly from ecosystems, such as food, water,

fuels, medicines and fibres;


regulating services – the benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes, such as

water regulation, erosion control, regulation of climate cycles and pollination;

cultural services – the largely non-consumptive benefits obtained from ecosystems, such as

spiritual, religious and aesthetic well-being.

supporting services – supporting services encompass the main ecosystem processes that

underpin all other services, such as soil formation, photosynthesis, primary production, nutrients,

and water cycling. Supporting services make it possible for the ecosystems to provide the above

services.

The linkage to and dependence on the natural world is complex and introduces the concept of social-

ecological systems, which is defined by Berkes and Folke (1998) as complex, integrated systems in

which humans are part of nature. One approach to better understand the dynamics of social-

ecological systems is the ‘resilience’ thinking approach (Folke 2006). The United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (IPCC 2007) defines resilience as ‘The ability of a social or ecological

system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the

capacity for self-organisation, and the capacity to adapt to stress and change’. Resilience describes

the degree to which the system is capable of self-organisation, learning and adaptation (Holling 1973;

Gunderson and Holling 2002; Walker et al. 2004). A resilience-thinking approach attempts to

investigate how these interacting social-ecological systems can best be managed to ensure a

sustainable and resilient supply of the essential ecosystem services on which humanity depends

(Biggs et al. 2015).

Managing ecosystems to conserve and improve ecosystem health is crucial for sustaining the various

ecosystem services important to human well-being. When resilience is strengthened, social-

ecological systems can maintain their structure and function. When resilience is reduced and a

social-ecological system becomes vulnerable, a system may be affected by disturbances that

previously would not have negatively influenced the system. This disturbance may cause the basic

structure and function of a social-ecological system to alter and the ecosystem services that once

benefited humans become diminished (Resilience Alliance 2017).

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) reports that approximately 60% of all ecosystem

services and up to 70% of regulating services are being degraded or used unsustainably. A major

compounding factor to human induced ecosystem degradation is climate change, which increases

the frequency and intensity of climate-related disasters, and exacerbates ecosystem degradation

(Munang et al. 2012). These detrimental changes to ecosystems and the effect on the provision of

ecosystem services weaken the resilience of vulnerable ecosystems and societies. Communities

around the world are already vulnerable to the impacts of climate related hazards. Munang et al.

(2012) reports that the number of disasters linked to natural hazards continues to rise, while in recent

times (1975–2008), over 2.2 million people globally have lost their lives in natural hazard-induced

disasters (excluding epidemics), with associated economic losses at approximately USD 1,527.6

billion (UNISDA 2009).

There is growing evidence that ecosystem services are critical to human society resilience, i.e. how

linked social-ecological systems can deal with shocks and stressors (Carabine 2015). Carabine

(2015) defines human resilience to include four outcomes: (1) providing basic needs for health and


well-being, (2) supporting livelihoods; (3) building social capital, stability and security; and (4)

reducing exposure to natural hazards and enhancing adaptive capacity in a changing climate.

Table 1-1 presents the four ecosystem service types (provisioning, regulating, cultural and

supporting) and how these ecosystem services contribute to the human resilience outcomes listed

above.


Table 1-1 Summary of ecosystem services’ contribution to human resilience outcomes (Carabine 2015)

Ecosystem Service Resilience

Provisioning Services Regulating Services Cultural Services Supporting Services

Basic needs, health and well-being

Food production by agro- ecosystems underpins food security

Food production (protein) by aquaculture and fisheries

Forests and mountains produce water used to support agriculture

Water supply supported by vegetation, soils and microorganisms

Fuel and fibre for shelter, cooking and heating

Biochemicals with medicinal value derived from a range of ecosystems

Crop genetic diversity increases and sustains food production and quality

Climate regulation by oceans, forests

Carbon storage in soils, vegetation and oceans

Soil biodiversity regulates soil ecosystem for primary production and nutrient cycling

Water regulation and purification

Pollination by animal vectors

Biological control of crop, livestock and human diseases

Health benefits from air and water purification

Foster sense of place of intrinsic value to all societies

Cultural identity and well-being

Traditional ecological knowledge enables use of resources and survival

Food preferences linked to food provision, wild foods as important reserves

Relatively intangible in general

Culture can mediate access to resources creating winners and losers

Psychological/health benefits from access to green open spaces in urban areas

Primary production, nutrient cycling and soil formation – which underpin all ecosystem services and is therefore critical to all human resilience outcomes

Livelihoods Fisheries and agro-ecosystems vital to livelihoods and economies across the world

Sustainable livelihoods supported by natural capital

Fibre and fuel products that generate income (e.g. timber, biofuels, etc.), but values vary

Natural resources are basis of industry, manufacturing, trade, medicine and tourism

Health and wellbeing from access to green open space

Water provision, pollination and soil quality are all crucial for food security but often do not accrue financial benefits for small-scale farmers and pastoralists

Biological control of agricultural pests reduces economic losses

Species and biodiversity can act as bio-indicators of environmental stress

Cultural status linked to biodiversity and can enable or impede livelihood opportunities

Institutions and norms have evolved in cultures closely linked to environments

Such cultural diversity can be of tourism value

Nature-based tourism and recreational value are basis of many livelihoods

Aesthetic value of ecosystems contributes to use of open spaces and other nature-based facilities


can increase economic productivity

Biodiversity often yields high-value incomes from tourism and related activities

Freedom of choice to pursue livelihoods

Social capital, stability and security

Declines in ES can lead to violent conflict and social turmoil if scarce

Food security and human security are linked

Green open spaces in urban areas can reduce crime and aggression

Natural resource access and management has evolved with institutions particular to systems

Climate change and breakdowns in climate regulation services are increasingly becoming security problems

Environmental change can impact on social cohesion and institutions

Regulation of disease ecology prevents breakdown of social order/stability

Many customs and institutions have been established to manage regulating ES

Natural resource markets can shape social relationships at local and global levels

Demands for natural resources are shifting through urbanisation, etc.

Recreational, spiritual, mental health and amenity values

Reduced exposure and enhanced adaptive capacity

Strong and sustainable livelihoods build resilience to recover from disasters

Diverse food products resilient to shocks, e.g. pest outbreaks, drought

Fibre and fuel can be a cause of disaster risk, e.g. wildfire in shifting landscapes

Provision of food, water and energy important for enhancing adaptive capacity in a changing climate

Ecosystems can act as barriers or buffers to extreme events and natural hazards

Economic losses and deaths can be reduced by provision of such ES

Regulating ES is also core to adapting to long-term stresses e.g. climate change

Perceptions and responses to natural hazards influenced by cultural and social factors

Cultural factors and traditional ecological knowledge can reduce risk and build adaptive capacity


2 ESRAM methodology

2.1 Study approach

The three Solomon Island ESRAM studies (national, local, city) follow the generic methodology

described in this chapter and summarised in Table 2-1. This generic methodology has been adapted

for each of the different spatial scale/location contexts, depending on factors such as geographic

extent, stakeholder engagement requirements and community/population size. Additional and/or

specific methods relevant to a scale/location are detailed in the respective ESRAM reports.

Table 2-1 Study tasks

Task and Component Methodology Section

Task 1 Ecosystem baseline and threat assessment

Identify the current state of ecosystems, trends and drivers of change with root causes, scenarios, governance factors

2.2.1

Identify ecosystem types, ecosystem services and threats 2.2

Identify ecosystem services that are valued by the community 2.2.2

Map key ecosystems and related ecosystem services, including high-use areas and/or major threats based on existing spatial data

2.2.3

Task 2 Ecosystem valuation

Undertake a ‘total economic valuation’ to define the economic value of key ecosystems services relevant to ESRAM

2.3

Task 3 Condition and threat analysis

Assess the vulnerability of ecosystem services to the effects of climate change based on climate change projections

2.4

Identify the ecosystem services most vulnerable to future climate and non-climate threats and impacts

2.5

Recommend EbA options to strengthen the resilience of key ecosystem services 2.5

2.2 Ecosystem baseline and threats assessment

The initial step in the ESRAM assessments was to establish an inventory and understanding of the

ecosystems and key ecosystem services to be assessed with respect to climate change and other

non-climate drivers. Information for this component was derived from a combination of sources

described in the following sections.

2.2.1 Review of existing literature

In the context of the environmental aspects of the ESRAM assessments, there were significant gaps

in the available literature. Despite the increase in environmental studies and assessments in recent

times, environmental literature for Solomon Islands concentrates primarily on the ecosystems and/or

ecosystem components that are deemed to be of key conservation value. These ecosystems or

ecosystem components include:


vertebrate terrestrial fauna and avifauna (i.e. birds and mammals), especially endemic fauna (e.g.

Filardi et al. 2007; Pikacha 2008; Pikacha et al. 2012).

areas identified as a high priority for environmental protection due to factors such as a pristine

condition, unique nature, high biodiversity and/or the presence of endemic fauna (e.g. Halpern et

al. 2013; Moseby et al. 2012; Pollard et al. 2013).

Often, these two topics interact to further restrict the scope of the available literature. The result is

that, even for environmental components that have been studied on numerous occasions, the

geographic coverage of available information may still be very limited and there are often extensive

gaps in knowledge and context for other locations. Conversely, where national scale documents exist

among the environmental literature (e.g. Pacific Horizon Group 2008; Sulu et al. 2012; Albert et al.

2013; Lavery et al. 2016), they are typically of a very broad and generic nature. The Solomon Islands

Marine Assessment (Green et al. 2006) is a notable exception, detailing marine survey results

throughout the country in a national scale report.

Ecosystem components of direct economic importance (e.g. to fisheries or forestry industries) are

also captured in the literature. Remaining information gaps relate to major ecosystem components,

both biological and physical, that contribute to ecosystem services. Key examples where there is a

notable paucity of country-specific information include:

invertebrate fauna;

groundwater ecosystems;

phytoplankton / zooplankton;

deep sea habitats and communities;

physico-chemical environmental drivers (i.e. of ecosystem processes and biological

communities); and

unconsolidated (i.e. non-reef) seabed habitats and associated communities.

The smaller scale locations that will be focused on as part of the present project (i.e. Wagina and

Honiara) are rarely mentioned in the environmental literature, in part due to the factors described

below.

(1) Honiara – Being the national capital, Honiara is highly developed and most environmental

values are highly modified or degraded. For this reason, environmental assessments tend to

focus on less disturbed locations elsewhere, or in locations subject to specific industry

developments, such as logging and mining (e.g. Morrison et al. 2007; SMM 2012; Envi-Green

Pacific 2012; Golder Associates 2014).

(5) Wagina Island – Being isolated from both the provincial capital Taro and priority terrestrial

conservation locations throughout Choiseul Province, Wagina has largely been overlooked by

the environmental literature. With the exception of marine works associated with the nearby

Anarvon Marine Conservation Area (Green et al. 2006), the main environmental assessments

to have focused on Wagina Island are the environmental impact assessment(s) relating to the

mining development presently proposed for the island (Envi-Green Pacific 2012; Envi-Green

Pacific 2013).


2.2.2 Stakeholder workshops

In addition to sourcing existing information, in-country work was generally in the form of stakeholder

consultation workshops and a field component, noting that the format of these varied between

assessments (Table 2-2).

Table 2-2 Overview of stakeholder participation and field approaches

ESRAM Consultation Field

National One-day workshop with key stakeholders, primarily national government representatives (who are generally tertiary qualified, directly involved in environmental work and regularly consulted on environmental issues), to identify key ecosystems, services and threats on a broad national scale

Nil

Honiara Workshop with key stakeholder representatives (e.g. national government, community, local council and local projects) to identify key ecosystems, services and threats, and undertake interactive mapping activities

Site inspections at communities near Mataniko River, Vura District, White River, Independence Valley, Win Valley, waterfront areas of Honiara and other points of interest (i.e. as identified during the workshop activities). Included informal discussions with local community members on an opportunistic basis

Wagina Island

Workshops with each of the four communities to identify key ecosystems, services and threats, and undertake interactive mapping activities

Most detailed field component:

site inspections and guided tours of villages and surrounds

collection of GPS data for spatial validation

field surveys for mapping and qualitatively assess condition

locating water wells (mapping survey and water quality testing)

additional opportunistic observations

Dedicated workshops with representative stakeholders were the primary means of stakeholder

participation and engagement for informing the ESRAM assessments. Overall, six workshops were

undertaken as follows:

National – one workshop with key stakeholder representatives (mainly national government);

Wagina Island – four workshops, one ‘community level’ workshop at each of the four villages on

the island; and

Honiara - one workshop with a variety of key stakeholder representatives.

The field methodology specific to each of the Honiara and Wagina Island assessments is detailed in

the respective report volumes (2 and 3). The workshops had multiple broad objectives, as listed

below.

Provide follow up on earlier PEBACC meetings hosted by SPREP.

Advise attendees about the ESRAM study and its part in the broader PEBACC project.


Provide some awareness of ecosystems, ecosystem services and climate change. Source

information and local knowledge from attendees to inform the ESRAM assessments, with a

particular focus on:

○ identifying ecosystems;

○ documenting key ecosystem services in terms of the community’s direct dependence on their

local land and sea resources, including ascertaining the relative value of resources to the

community (i.e. which resources are essential and/or valued most); and

○ undertaking interactive mapping exercises (primarily at Honiara and Wagina Island

workshops) to spatially document ecosystem services, with a particular focus on high-use

areas..

Identify existing threats to the ecosystems and/or ecosystem services.

Identify additional information sources not already obtained/consulted.

The Honiara and national workshops were facilitated by Dr Simon Albert (University of Queensland)

and Dr Beth Toki (BMT WBM), while the Wagina Island workshops were jointly facilitated by David

Boseto (Ecological Solutions Solomon Islands) and Dr Tammy Tabe. All workshops allocated a large

proportion of time to participatory activities, whereby attendees had opportunities to inform the

assessment directly. For these activities, the stakeholder representatives were assigned to groups

(four groups per workshop) to discuss, document and map the required information. This worked

particularly well for the Honiara and Wagina Island workshops, where each group was able to focus

on either a defined geographic area or an ecosystem type. Workshop participants for all three

locations provided invaluable input to all workshop activities, particularly the spatial documentation

of ecosystem services.

Further information on the attendees and specific objectives of workshop(s) for each assessment are

provided in the relevant report volume.

2.2.3 Mapping

Maps were generated to identify the key ecosystems and related ecosystem services, including high

use areas and/or major threats, where possible. Maps were produced in MapInfo Professional v12

using the following data sets:

national government ministries and the SOLGEO spatial data sets;

interactive mapping outputs from the stakeholder workshops (i.e. manual mapping directly on

high resolution satellite imagery, which was subsequently digitised);

remote sensing – using publicly available satellite imagery to remotely digitise ecosystems (e.g.

forest extent, rivers) where existing data were not available, inadequate or required fine-tuning;

field surveys and on-ground validation – for Honiara and Wagina Island, location data were

collected using a hand-held GPS (e.g. locations of specific points of interest, community uses,

threats, land marks, ecosystem types and boundaries); and

Additional GIS data sources, such as local and regional projects (e.g. UN-Habitat, MACBIO).


2.3 Economic valuations

2.3.1 Economic approach

The purpose of quantifying values as part of the ESRAM process was to provide insights on the

relative extent and magnitude of ecosystems and ecosystem service values across and between

different environments. However, while it may be simple to identify the existence of ecosystem

services, valuing ecosystem goods and services such as clean air, clean water, and biodiversity is

complicated, as these goods are often not traded in markets, meaning that they do not have an

obvious economic value revealed through consumers’ willingness to pay (market prices). As a result,

unregulated markets, or goods and services such as ecosystems services, often become

compromised or collapse. By placing a value on ecosystem services, priorities can be given to

protecting and restoring ecosystems through programmes, policies and actions. Additionally, if

ecosystems and their services are not valued, they may be overused or damaged, as there is no

incentive to protect or conserve the service (King and Mazzotta 2000).

Ecosystem valuations can assist resource managers to deal with the effects of market failures (i.e.

inability of a market to reflect the full social costs or benefits of goods or services), by measuring their

costs to society, in terms of lost economic benefits (King and Mazzotta 2000). These costs to society

can then be imposed on those who are responsible, or can be used to establish the value of actions

to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts.

Typically, the framework used to identify the full range of ecosystem service values is known as ‘total

economic valuation’ (TEV). The TEV of ecosystem services includes both use and non-use values

and is sometimes also referred to as triple bottom line (TBL), with triple reflecting economic,

environmental and social values. By definition, use values refer to the satisfaction that involves a

physical encountering, while non-use values involve no actual physical involvement (direct or

indirect) with an entity (Kareiva 2012). The latter is generally associated with existence value, which

is the satisfaction one receives from the sole contemplation of the existence of an entity (Kareiva

2012). For example, a person who has never visited and never intends to visit the Great Barrier Reef

can still obtain satisfaction from knowing it exists.

A simple conceptualisation of the TEV framework is shown in Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1 Categories for total economic valuation


For non-use values, there are two broad approaches for determining values: revealed preference

and stated preference. Revealed preference methods utilise prices from related services or products

to estimate non-use values, while stated preference methods utilise survey methods to outline

people’s preferences (and willingness to pay) for social and environmental changes. Both of these

methods require significant resources and time to implement, and it is not always possible to adopt

these methods in practice. A common way to overcome these limitations is to use ‘benefit transfer’.

Benefit transfer in its simplest form uses ecosystem values calculated for one locality to estimate the

values for another (similar) locality. This can be used to leverage previous non-use valuation studies,

as well as to substitute for market values where local information is insufficient (e.g. fish prices from

a neighbouring province or island could be used as a proxy for the target site).

Both the TEV framework and benefit transfer have underpinned the ecosystem service valuation

methodology used for this project. To do this, a relatively straightforward framework was utilised to

identify, describe and value (where possible) the ecosystem services. The same methodology was

used across the three spatial scales considered in the project, with different inputs used as

appropriate. An overview of the approach is shown in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-2 Overarching methodology for economic valuations

2.3.2 Step 1: Filter and sort ecosystem services

Before valuing the ecosystem services, it was necessary to filter and sort the services to assist with

the valuation process. This was done to help consolidate the valuation requirements and to better

reflect that scope of the project.

The sorting process was guided by ecosystems present at each scale, the identified services,

available valuation studies (for non-use values), and local economic information where available (e.g.

market prices and production data for market values).


2.3.3 Step 2: Establish ecosystem unit values

Once the ecosystem services were appropriately filtered and considered, an inventory of ecosystem

unit values was developed. Values were developed based on local inputs and valuation studies

(benefit transfer).

To maximise the accuracy and appropriateness of inputs within the project scope and timeline, a

‘bottom-up, top down’ approach was adopted to selecting values. This essentially meant that, where

possible, local scale data and information were used for establishing unit values in the first instance

(i.e. ‘bottom-up’). Where local level figures were not available, figures from other locations and global

averages were identified for benefit transfer (i.e. ‘top-down’) to fill gaps. Values were presented in

2015 dollars, and in two currencies: Solomon Island Dollars (SBD) and United States Dollars (USD).

Where values were used from previous years, consumer price index figures were used to account

for inflation, based on government data. Where conversion was required, the United Nations

Operational Rates of Exchange were used.

This approach helped to maximise the coverage of ecosystem values to ecosystem services whilst

favouring local values. Additionally, more recent and robust information sources were favoured, with

each input being considered on a case-by-case basis.

The most relevant and adaptable local information was found in the MACBIO National Marine

Ecosystem Service Valuation, Solomon Islands (2015), which provides detailed data on ecosystem

service values across the country. This information was used wherever applicable. It should be noted

that, while MACBIO provided a number of relatively robust and applicable values, many were quite

specific and did not necessarily capture the full range of ecosystem services. Furthermore, due to

the different ways in which different studies capture and produce data, there may be duplication

between values. Where this occurs, values for the same or overlapping ecosystem services have

been presented alongside each other for each of the three geographic scales.

Where localised values could not be identified, global median values were used. These values were

sourced from a study by de Groot et al. (2012) which builds on over 320 publications and incorporates

over 655 value estimates.

The data from de Groot et al. were sorted by removing all studies that contained values from

countries ranked as ‘High Income’ countries by the World Bank, as of September 2016, and removing

studies that were published prior to 1990. The median values were then calculated for the remaining

studies.

2.3.4 Step 3: Calculate ecosystem service values

The next step of the process was to generate indicative values for ecosystem services at the target

scale. This was done at a high-level, based on the inventory of values developed in the previous

step, as well as the spatial and population data from other sections of the ESRAM report.

The values generated are indicative only and provide an estimate of their benefits to society –

benefits that would be lost if they were destroyed or gained if they were restored. It must be noted

that values may be more or less accurate in reality. The following passage summarises the need for

and trade-offs in using benefits transfer:


Although the use of high-quality primary research to estimate values is preferred in

most cases, the realities of the policy process, particularly time and budget

constraints, often dictate that benefit transfer is the only feasible option. Given these

realities, benefit transfer has become a central component of virtually all large-scale

benefit-cost analyses. Hence, while benefit transfers are subject to a variety of

potential errors, the literature increasingly recognizes the need for the resulting

information (Johnston et al. 2015: 20).

2.4 Climate change assessment

2.4.1 Current and future climate projections

A summary of the current climate for Solomon Islands was based on the assessments by Pacific-

Australia Climate Change Science and Adaptation Planning (PACCSAP) and sourced from:

the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2011). Climate Change in the Pacific: Scientific

Assessment and New Research, Volume 2: Country Reports; and

the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2014). Climate Variability, Extremes and

Change in the Western Tropical Pacific: New Science and Updated Country Reports.

The climate projections for Solomon Islands for this assessment (Australian Bureau of Meteorology

and CSIRO [2014]) are based on the very high IPCC emissions scenario Representative

Concentration Pathways (RCP) 8.5, the highest scenario of the 5th Assessment Report, for the short

term (2030) and longer term (2090).

To identify immediate potential threats and vulnerabilities of ecosystems services, the 2030

timeframe was selected and 2090 chosen for long-term planning. For adaptation planning purposes,

particularly for long term, i.e. 2090, the RCP 8.5 emission scenario was chosen for this assessment

because it provides the worst case scenarios for projected climate change. In addition, it should be

noted that greenhouse gas emissions are currently tracking at the higher end of the emissions

scenarios. Building ecosystem resilience to worst-case climate induced changes is likely to lead to

significant co-benefits to community livelihoods and the environment.

The latest global climate model (GCM) projections and climate science findings for Solomon Islands

indicate:

very high confidence that El Niño and La Niña events will continue to occur in the future, but it is

not clear whether these events will change in intensity or frequency;

very high confidence that annual mean temperatures and extremely high daily temperatures will

continue to rise;

very high confidence that sea level will continue to rise;

very high confidence that ocean acidification is expected to continue;

very high confidence that the risk of coral bleaching will increase in the future;

high confidence that more extreme rain events will occur;

low confidence that annual rainfall is projected to increase slightly;


low confidence that drought is projected to decrease slightly;

low confidence that December–March wave heights are projected to decrease; and

low confidence that there will be no significant changes projected in June–September waves.

Refer to Appendix B for further information on the data sets used by PACCSAP for Solomon Islands,

as well as further information on emission scenarios.


Figure 2-3 Ecosystems and their services for the Solomon Islands


2.4.2 Climate change vulnerability assessment

The key objective of ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change is to develop solutions that will

help decrease vulnerability and increase the resilience of communities and ecosystems to climate

change threats. The vulnerability of ecosystems to climate change is the degree to which ecosystems

are susceptible to the adverse effects of climate change, which is a function of its exposure to climate

stimuli, sensitivity of the service to these stimuli, and its adaptive capacity to climate change, as

defined below (IPCC 2007).

Exposure refers to the nature and degree to which an ecosystem is exposed to significant climatic

variations or threats.

Sensitivity refers to the degree to which an ecosystem is affected, either adversely or

beneficially, by climate-related stimuli. The effect may be direct (e.g. coral bleaching in response

to temperature rise) or indirect (e.g. seagrass dieback due to sedimentation from extreme rainfall

events).

Adaptive capacity refers to the ability of an ecosystem to adjust to climate change, to moderate

potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences.

A climate change vulnerability assessment was undertaken, based on exposure, sensitivity and

adaptive capacity of key ecosystem services to potential climate change threats identified for

Solomon Islands. This assessment was based on the process presented in Figure 2-4 and outlined

below.

Figure 2-4 Climate change vulnerability assessment conceptual framework


(1) Identification of provisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural ecosystem services

(2) For each climate change threat, the vulnerability of each ecosystem service was evaluated.

In order to do this, each ecosystem service was given a score between 1 and 3 for exposure

and sensitivity (1 = low, 2 = moderate, 3 = high).

(3) The exposure and sensitivity ratings were used to calculate the potential impact of the climate

change threat to each ecosystem service, where:

Potential Impact = Exposure x Sensitivity

(4) The adaptive capacity of the ecosystem service to the climate change threat considered the

vulnerabilities of both natural and human systems and the links between them, and was scored

between 1 and 3, where:

1 = ecosystem service has a high adaptive capacity to climate change threat (e.g. food

gardens can be readily relocated inland in response to sea-level rise)

2 = ecosystem service has moderate adaptive capacity to climate change threat (e.g.

saltmarsh has some adaptive capacity to migrate with sea-level rise)

3 = ecosystem service has low adaptive capacity to climate change threat (e.g. reef

has low adaptive capacity to aragonite concentrations <3)

(5) The product of the potential impact ranking and adaptive capacity was calculated to determine

the overall vulnerability of the ecosystem service to the climate change threat, where:

Vulnerability = Potential Impact 𝑥 Adaptive Capacity

Ecosystems services that scored 18 or more are predicted to be highly to very highly vulnerable to

the specified climate change variable for 2030 and/or 2090. The results of the vulnerability

assessment were used to identify adaptation management options.

This vulnerability assessment has used a similar approach to the assessment undertaken in the

Solomon Islands National Report: TA7394-REG: Strengthening the capacity of developing member

countries to respond to climate change (International Centre for Environmental Management 2012).

2.5 ESRAM study outcomes

The resilience of ecosystem services to human-induced and climate change impacts was assessed,

based on the information obtained from the tasks outlined above, including: the current state of

ecosystems; social-economic and ecological trends; drivers of change and environment

consequences, scenarios, and governance factors; key ecosystems and ecosystem services utilised

by Solomon Island communities and economies; and the economic value of ecosystem services.

Based on these findings, recommended EbA options were compiled in order to guide the adaptation

and management of ecosystem services vulnerable to the existing and future impacts of climate-

related and human-induced threats identified at the national scale. Potential key stakeholder groups

and organisations were also identified to support, enable and implement EbA options.


3 National scale ESRAM – context

This chapter provides relevant context for the national scale ESRAM assessment, including:

additional methodology, primarily providing further stakeholder workshop details and grouping of

ecosystem services for valuation; and

information about the national setting, such as the national socio-economic profile, introduction to

local biodiversity and conservation, national governance and climate change governance.

3.1 Specific methodology

The following reports provide the primary existing information that forms the underlying basis and

understanding for ecosystems at a national scale in this assessment, and the current state of

ecosystems, trends and drivers of change, scenarios and governance factors (see Section 4). The

reports listed below should be referred to for further context and information.

Solomon Islands State of the Environment Report 2008 (Pacific Horizon 2008)

Freshwater biotas of the Solomon Islands (Polhemus et al. 2008)

Solomon Islands Forest Life – Information on biology and management of forest resources

(Lavery et al. 2016)

State of the Coral Reefs of Solomon Islands (Sulu et al. 2012)

Solomon Islands Marine Life: information on biology and management of marine resources (Albert

et al. 2013)

State of Conservation In Solomon Islands – Country Report 2013 (SPREP 2016)

Solomon Islands Marine Assessment (Green et al. 2006)

The dedicated stakeholder workshop for this assessment provided the primary means for focussing

the scope of the assessment (i.e. stakeholder liaison and participation during the workshop was used

to identify what the ‘key’ ecosystems and ecosystem services were). Objectives specific to the

national ESRAM stakeholder workshop were to:

acquire inputs and advice from representative key stakeholders, especially representatives from

national government ministries;

define the focus of the assessment – i.e. what are the ‘key’ ecosystem services and where are

they most important?

identify key existing threats at the national scale; and

identify available existing information and data for further informing the assessment (e.g. existing

spatial data sources).

The stakeholder workshop was held in Honiara on 9 August 2016 and was attended by 26

participants representing the following organisations:

Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology


Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources

Ministry of Forestry and Research

Ministry of Infrastructure and Development

Ministry of Development, Planning and Aid Coordination

Solomon Island Community Resilience to Climate and Disaster Risk Project (CRISP)

Solomon Island Water Sector Adaptation Project (UNDP)

Prime Minister’s Office

UN-Habitat project

Solomon Islands National University

Ecological Solutions SI

SPREP

WWF-Pacific.

Participants comprised both males (62%) and females (38%) as per Table 3-1, and all were actively

involved in contributing to the workshop’s participatory activites. In terms of statistical representation,

the sample size of 26 participants is considered small and unreliable.

Example photographs of groups participating in these activities on the day are shown in Figure 3-1,

while a full list of the attendees is provided in Appendix A.

Table 3-1 Summary of stakeholder workshop attendees, 9 August 2016

Aspect Workshop detail

Number of participants 26

Male proportion 62% (16)

Female proportion 38% (10)

3.1.1 Grouping of ecosystem services for valuation

Workshops for identifying national scale ecosystem services identified over 100 different services.

Furthermore, many of these services are highly critical for segments of the populace and would lead

to serious consequences if lost.

Due to the quantum of services listed and the scale at which they are being considered (i.e. national)

it was determined that it was not feasible to provide values for each service. This was primarily due

to the available information on ecosystem values not adequately matching the specificity of services

identified, as well as the fact that individual service values were likely to be highly variable across

the country (e.g. the ocean as a food source may be relied upon to different extents in different areas

and may be utilised differently, thus changing the value of the service in different locations within

Solomon Islands).

To overcome this, it was determined that the most appropriate method for capturing the values for

as many listed ecosystem services as possible was to use global median values.


To achieve this, representative ecosystems were grouped to match the biomes defined in the global

median values used for the project (see de Groot et al. 2012). This was done to avoid duplication,

whilst ensuring as many of the ecosystems described above were considered. The revised list of

ecosystems selected for valuation includes:

coral reefs

coastal systems

coastal wetlands

freshwater lakes and rivers

inland wetlands

tropical forests

grasslands.

The ecosystems and services that could not be assessed were groundwater and

plantations/gardens. Groundwater, while an exceptionally important ecosystem service, has been

poorly captured in past ecosystem valuation studies and there is not a reliable global value that can

be applied in the same manner as other ecosystem services (see Greibler and Avramov 2013 for

further information). While groundwater values can be readily broadly defined (e.g. drinking water

supply, water purification), relevant information was not available or applicable to the national scale,

and was also not representative of the full range of ecosystem services from groundwater (see Brink

et al. 2011).

Plantations and gardens provide a range of services and products to humans, and can also perform

ecosystem services, such as regulation of soil and water quality. However, at the same time,

agricultural practices (including crops and gardens) can also cause ecosystem disservices, e.g.

contaminating water and increasing sedimentation run-off. The exact value of these types of systems

are therefore a function of the services and disservices they provide and vary greatly, depending on

the land-use type and the natural environment it is replacing. It is not feasible to provide a high-level

value that could be applied to cultivated land across Solomon Islands.

Despite this, the project team considered, where plausible, the economic benefits of agricultural

production in weighing up the costs and benefits in the options assessment phase of the project.


a) b)

c) d)

Figure 3-1 Stakeholders at the national workshop conducting participatory activities in groups (photographs courtesy of Simon Albert)


3.2 Geographic setting

Solomon Islands is an island state, located in the south-west Pacific Ocean and spread across the

third largest archipelago in the South Pacific (SPC 2008; Pollard et al. 2014). Located between 5-

12°S and 152-170°E, the archipelago comprises a double chain of approximately 1000 islands

extending over 1450 km in a south-eastern direction (Mueller-Dombois and Fosberg 1998; Filardi et

al. 2007). It includes seven major islands groups (Guadalcanal, Malaita, Makira-Ulawa, Isabel, the

New Georgia Group, Rennell and Bellona, and Choiseul), and over 900 smaller islands, islets, atolls

and cayes (Filardi et al. 2007).

Being an island state, the nation has a relatively small land area of around 28,785 km2 and an

extensive total marine area of around 1.3 million km2 (Gough et al. 2010; Pollard et al. 2014).

Nine of the larger islands exceed 900 m in elevation (Guadalcanal 2450 m, Kolombangara 1768 m,

Isabel 1250 m, Rendova 1063 m, Malaita 1280 m, New Georgia 1006 m, Vangunu 1124 m, Makira

1040 m, Choiseul 970 m) (Filardi et al. 2007).

The volcanic islands are mostly steep, with river systems that are usually short (<100 km) and

watershed areas that vary in size, depending on local terrain and topography (Gehrke et al. 2011;

Boseto et al. 2016).

3.3 National socio-economic profile

The population of Solomon Islands in 2014 was approximately 609,800, with a rapid annual growth

rate of 2.07% (SPREP 2016). The UN classifies Solomon Islands as a ‘Least Developed Nation’

with most people living in coastal villages, practising a subsistence lifestyle, and retaining customary

ownership of their land and shallow seas.

The population can be divided into urban and rural residents. Approximately one-fifth (102,030) of

the population during 2009 was classified as urban dwellers (2009 census data), of which over 70%

resided in the capital city of Honiara. With an annual urban growth rate of 4.7%, it is anticipated that

by 2020 approximately 25% of the Solomon Island population will be living in urban areas if the

present trend continues (UN-Habitat 2012). While urbanisation in Solomon Islands is a relatively

recent phenomenon, the predicted urban growth rate is expected to present confronting challenges,

such as urban poverty, unemployment, housing, environmental risk, land administration, and

infrastructure provision and maintenance (UN-Habitat 2012).

Poverty in Solomon Islands is widespread and characterised by a lack of access to essential services

and income-earning opportunities (Solomon Islands Government Ministry of Development Planning

and Aid Coordination 2013). In 2013, Solomon Islands had an estimated GDP per capita of USD

3,400 (SPREP 2016). Income distribution is inequitable, with rural expenditure levels significantly

below expenditure levels in urban areas. Similarly, social indicators, although improving, are among

the worst in the region (ibid). Employment rates are somewhat unclear. The 2009 census reports a

rate of only 2.0% unemployment but, under the census definition, the ‘employed’ include subsistence

workers, who make up more than 50% of the workforce (ibid).

With more than 80% of the labour force engaged in subsistence agriculture and fishing (Filardi et al.

2007) in rural communities, the need for high-income generation is low. However, cash is still


required for essential items (e.g. transportation, school fees, manufactured goods – machetes, axes,

fishing line, fish hooks) and valued luxuries (e.g. boats, mobile phones, flashlights, radios, coffee,

sugar, rice, biscuits). Cash is also needed for church contributions and special occasions. For cash

requirements, the rural economy is typically dependent on producing a small number of commodities,

including fresh fruit, coconut, cocoa, timber, as well as fish and marine products (ARDS 2007;

Feinberg 2010; Abernathy et al. 2014).

More broadly, the main industries are agriculture, fishing, forestry and mining, and most

manufactured goods and petroleum products are imported. According to the 2009 census:

Natural resources include fish, forests, gold, bauxite, phosphates, lead, zinc, and nickel.

Agriculture products include cocoa beans, coconuts, palm kernels, rice, potatoes,

vegetables, fruit; timber; cattle, pigs; and fish. The main industries are fish (tuna),

mining, timber, palm oil, and tourism. (Census Report 2009: 2)

Timber, copra, fish, palm oil and cocoa are the most significant exports, with increasing interest and

prospecting in the mining industry over the last decade. Timber exports generate 60–70% of total

foreign export earnings (from royalties), and it is estimated that one in six Solomon Islanders are

employed by the industry (Filardi et al. 2007). Timber was the main export product until 1998, when

world prices for timber from tropical forests declined (SPREP 2016). Logging fell by 3.0% in 2013

but still recorded the country’s third largest annual harvest (ibid). This rate of extraction and its heavy

reliance on logging previously harvested forests appears unsustainable, and logging is expected to

decline at an average annual rate of 8% in the medium term (ADB 2014). Exploitation of fisheries

offers prospects for export and domestic economic expansion. Tourism, particularly diving, is an

important service industry for Solomon Islands, but growth in tourist numbers is hindered by lack of

infrastructure and security concerns (SPREP 2016).

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, improving sustainable

agriculture and rural development is an important means to improving resilience and reducing

vulnerability to natural disasters and climate change (FAO 2016). Solomon Islands has a similar

Human Development Index ranking to that of nearby countries, such as Vanuatu and Kiribati, and is

categorised in the low human development category (UNDP 2015).

Since the conflicts in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Solomon Islands has recovered well, but the

economy continues to face several challenges. Exports remain commodities-based and logging rates

are considered to be unsustainable (SOE Report 2008; SPREP 2016; Kabutaulaka 2000, 2006).

3.4 Biodiversity and conservation

Solomon Islands is renowned as a global biodiversity hotspot, characterised by exceptional patterns

of inter-island diversity and high degrees of endemism, both within the region and on individual

islands (Filardi et al. 2007; Conservation International 2013). It has the second highest terrestrial

biodiversity in the Pacific (exceeded only by Papua New Guinea), with an estimated 5,599 described

species, including: 2,597 plants, 245 birds, 75 mammals, 87 reptiles, 19 amphibians, and 777 fish

and 1,799 invertebrate species, as per the IUCN Red List (Menazza and Balasinorwala 2012).


Solomon Islands is also part of the Coral Triangle, the global centre of marine biodiversity that

comprises 76% of the world’s corals and 37% of the world’s coral reef fish species, in an area that

covers less than 2% of the planet’s oceans (TNC 2008).

While basic taxonomic and distribution data are lacking for many taxa (Filardi et al. 2007) and it is

likely that many species remain undescribed, the following is noted from the existing literature.

Patterns of avian endemism are particularly noteworthy and have received the most attention

(ibid). While at least 163 species of breeding land birds, including 72 endemic species, are known

(Ciamond and Mayr 1976), an additional 62 bird species are represented by unique sub-species

on different islands throughout the country (Morrison et al. (2007). Overall, the Solomon group’s

endemic bird area (EBA) has the greatest number of restricted range bird species of all the world’s

EBAs. Further, most of the larger islands have their own endemic species and/or subspecies

(Filardi et al. 2007).

Other taxonomic groups also reveal high endemism; more than half of the known palm and orchid

species are endemic, as are 75% of climbing Pandanus species, 21% mammals and there is high

reptile and amphibian endemism – over 80% of all frogs are endemic (Filardi et al. 2007).

Tetepare Island deserves a special mention from a biodiversity and conservation perspective. It

is the largest uninhabited island in the South Pacific, totalling 18 square km, retaining >96% of its

old growth rainforest, and supporting several endemic and rare species (Moseby et al. 2012).

The island is recognised as an area of international biological and conservation significance by

those who have carried out biological surveys there (e.g. Read and Moseby 2006; Keppel 2007;

Jenkins and Boseto 2007), and it supports important refuge populations for species of

international conservation significance (Jenkins and Boseto 2007).

The rich biological diversity and high endemicity of Solomon Islands is most likely due to the area’s

geographical complexity (Conservation International 2013). Numerous tectonic events between the

Pacific and Australian tectonic plates formed a diverse range of islands of varying age and isolation

(Meuller-Dubois 1998). The islands have never been in land contact with the Asian or Australian

continents, or New Guinea Island, allowing a unique tropical rainforest flora and fauna to evolve with

high levels of endemism (Furusawa et al. 2014).

Throughout Solomon Islands, environmental and natural resource management is predominantly

community based, in line with the local customary tenure and governance system. Approximately

87% of the land is classified as ’customary land’. The land and nearshore sea is both owned and

managed by traditional genealogical groups, such that rural communities themselves have autonomy

over their natural resources and the right both to close or to provide resource access (Abernathy et

al. 2014; Furusawa et al. 2014).

Tribal chiefs have the responsibility to manage both land and marine resources for the benefit of the

tribe, traditionally involving decisions over when to close fishing access to reefs and where to use

land for farming and dwellings (Aswani 1999). More recently, communities have been leasing rights

to fisheries or timber, primarily to companies from Malaysia, China and Japan (Halpern et al. 2013).

Given the customary tenure system, formal conservation initiatives are most commonly in the form

of community-based resource management (CBRM). More than 350 communities are known to have

carried out some sort of CBRM (Govan et al. 2015).


Government policies also recognise the value of CBRM, even for achieving objectives associated

with climate change. For example, the Solomon Islands National Plan of Action for the Coral Triangle

Initiative on Coral Reefs, Fisheries and Food Security (SI-NPOA CTI), and subsequently the Inshore

Fisheries Strategy (2010–2012), both recommend CBRM as the basis of resource management to

achieve a variety of goals covering climate change vulnerability and adaptation, ecosystem

approaches, food security, management of key species and habitats, and appropriate use of

protected areas (Govan et al. 2015).

In terms of protected areas, a relatively small proportion of the country is protected by formal

protected areas, with 28 land based and 24 marine protected areas formally recognised (PIPAP

2016). The Pacific Islands Protected Areas Portal (PIPAP 2016) states that 2.21% (644 km2) of the

total land area of Solomon Islands is protected, while 0.12% (1,926 km2) of the total marine area is

protected (WDPA 2013). The largest managed areas include (Figure 3-2):

East Rennell World Heritage Area (87,500 ha);

Anarvon Community Marine Conservation Area (16,187 ha); and

a notable network of marine protected areas in Temotu Province.

All other managed areas are typically small scale CBRM areas (Figure 3-2), which generally aim to

achieve sustainable resource use and secure resources for future exploitation (Halpern et al. 2013;

Abernathy et al. 2014).


Figure 3-2 Managed areas in Solomon Islands (image courtesy of MACBIO)


While the total area of protected and/or otherwise formally managed areas remains small, there has

been considerable recent investment in identifying areas of conservation significance for the

purposes of informing future conservation planning and development decisions. In particular, the

following have been identified at the national scale (Figure 3-4 and Figure 3-5).

Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs). KBAs are sites that contribute to the global persistence of

biodiversity, including vital habitat for threatened plant and animal species in terrestrial, freshwater

and marine ecosystems (BirdLife International 2017).

Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs). EBSAs are areas which, through

scientific criteria, have been identified as important for the healthy functioning of our oceans and

the services that they provide (CBD Secretariat 2012).

Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs). IBAs are KBAs identified for birds, using

internationally agreed criteria applied locally by experts (BirdLife International 2017).

These are predominantly terrestrial areas of significance, and together encompass a large proportion

of the total land area. Further information on individual KBAs, EBSAs and IBAs is provided in the

Solomon Island Government’s National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan (NBSAP) (Pauku and Lapo

2009) and supporting documents such as Filardi et al. (2007).

In the context of climate change and EbA, these significant areas are likely indicative of high value

or intact ecosystems that provide a range of ecosystem services at the national scale (i.e. services

in addition to those relating to biodiversity and conservation). They provide a starting point for

considering future adaptation and resilience-building initiatives, particularly where these significant

areas coincide with areas of high resource use or other existing/future threats.

Future conservation efforts, including those associated with EbA initiatives, should continue to

consider a ‘ridge-to-reef’ approach, which is already recognised as a holistic conservation strategy

that is appropriate in Solomon Islands. This approach focused on the importance of biological and

physical interactions and linkages between ecosystems (see example in Figure 3-3). This could

include, for example, the need to restrict

terrestrial vegetation clearing to reduce

sediment run-off to a nearby marine

protected area (MPA). Its importance is

also highlighted by freshwater fish. Since

amphidromy is the dominant life history

strategy for freshwater fish in Solomon

Islands (i.e. 25% of species rely on access

to move between fresh and saline waters),

conserving adequate ecological links

between freshwaters and estuarine/marine

waters is critical (Jenkins and Boseto 2007;

Jenkins et al. 2008).

Figure 3-3 Example of ridge-to-reef benefits (SPREP 2014)


Figure 3-4 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) (image courtesy MACBIO)


Figure 3-5 Important bird areas (IBAs) (image courtesy MACBIO)


3.5 National governance

Governance in Solomon Islands is split between formal state institutions and traditional and

community institutions. Formal state governance is led by a national, democratically elected

parliament of 50 members, each representing a single geographically defined electorate (Roughan

and Wara 2010). Executive government is derived from this parliament through a process of coalition

formation and the election of a prime minister who then appoints a cabinet. There are nine provinces

and each provincial government is elected through area elections. A matrix of customary authority,

church-based institutions and locale‐specific community bodies forms the main context for local level

governance, the exact nature and makeup of which varies considerably across all provinces (ibid).

Effective institutional administrations are imperative for environmental management and

enforcement of environmental legislation and policies. While governmental and inter-governmental

institutions have been established in Solomon Islands to govern and protect the management of

ecosystems, an update of environmental legislation is urgently needed. SPREP (2016) reports that

the region is hindered by the lack of capacity and resources to develop, monitor and enforce

environmental legislation, which is delayed by bureaucratic processes. The need for an institutional

overhaul is intensified by the projected rapid population increase over the coming decades and the

increase in economic and social development.

Improved integration and coordination of legislation, policies, strategies and programmes amongst

national and sub-national institutions and non-governmental institutions is also needed. Mataki

(2011) reports that the barriers to integration and better coordination are formed by the fragmented

and sectoral-based legislative and institutional frameworks and ‘turf protection’, as well as lack of

disciplinebased training of government officials. Due to capacity limitations at the local level, and the

scale and complexity of socio-ecological issues affecting Solomon Islands, actions to better manage

ecosystems and strengthen community resilience will benefit significantly from being aligned to

national and sectoral policies.

The national governance framework for Solomon Islands in terms of environmental threats facing the

country are outlined in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2 National governance framework (SPREP 2016)

Threats Legal Framework Institutional Arrangements Strategy/Plans/Comments

Land use and land-use change

Town and Country Planning Act [Ch 154]

The Ministry of Lands and Survey is responsible for the administering of land. The Town and Country Planning Board is responsible for regulating and providing approvals for proposed plan requests and building approvals. A local planning scheme (LPS) is submitted to the minister by the board and upon approval is published in the gazette. The LPS is to assist in the selection of, or to define sites for, particular purposes, whether by the

National Climate Change Policy 2012–2017

National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP)

Solomon Islands National Development Strategy 2011–2020

National Adaptation Program of Action (NAPA)

Pacific Mangroves Initiative, National Solid Waste Management Strategy.

The Ministry of Lands and Survey is responsible for the administering of land. The



carrying out of development thereon or otherwise.

Constitution of Solomon Islands explicitly recognises customary law and states that it will have effect as part of the law of Solomon Islands.

Environmental effect of developments and activities

No legislation specifically relating to the EIA process. The primary piece of legislation concerning EIAs is the Environment Act and the Environment Regulations 2008

The Ministry of Environment is responsible for regulating the Environment Act, including the overseeing of the EIA process for any development proposals. The Director of Environment and Conservation assesses the EIA report, letters and comments and decides whether or not to grant the mining, logging or whatever development proposal is before him. The director’s decision may be appealed against by the proponent to the Environment Advisory Committee (EAC) within 30 days of notice of decision. Proponents may further appeal the Environment Advisory Committee’s decision to the Minister of Environment.

NBSAP


National Solid Waste Management Strategy Landowners have a right to be given a copy of the EIA report, if logging or mining will affect their land or community. The thrust of the Environment Act is on the procedures of EIAs. It is a requirement of the act that all prescribed developments are required to undergo an EIA, for which development consent is required.

The Solomon Islands EIA guideline has been prepared by the Environment and Conservation Division with the aim of simplifying the procedures of EIA outlined in the act and accompanying Environment Regulations 2008. This was to provide basic advice and guidance on the EIA process for government officers, planners, developers, resource owners and those involved in processing development proposals.

Pollution and waste management

No legislation specific to pollution or waste management.

The key relevant legislation includes Environment Act 1998 and the Environment Regulations 2008

The Director of Environment is mandated to receive applications for licences to discharge waste or emit noise, odour or electronic magnetic radiation. The director may revoke or suspend the licence, if satisfied that there has been a breach of any of the conditions of the licence issued.

Under the Environment Act, the minister may make regulations on matters pertaining to the effectiveness of the act that include matters pertaining to pollution and waste management.

The director may serve abatement notices for non-

Japanese Technical Cooperation Project Promotion for Regional Initiative on Solid Waste Management (JPRISIM)


NBSAP

Solomon Islands National Development Strategy 2011–2020, National Adaptation Program of Action (NAPA)

National Solid Waste Management Strategy

There is a substantial lack of policy, strategy and government initiative and commitment to tackling Solomon islands’ pollution



compliance of provisions of a pollution abatement notice.

Environment inspectors may serve stop notices to persons not complying with any of the requirements contained in the pollution abatement notice.

and waste problems. There is a poor level of domestic wastewater disposal and solid waste management, which is the primary source of pollution to the marine environment. At least 75% of sewage flows through a piped collection system directly into the sea without treatment, reflecting the level of waste management in the country.

Deforestation and mining

Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation

Protected species

Mines and Minerals Act 1996

Mines and Minerals Regulations 1996

Legislation specific to mining is the Mines and Minerals Act 1996 and the Mines and Minerals Regulations 1996. The government department with primary responsibility for administration of the mineral sector is the Department of Mines and Energy. The government department with primary responsibility for administration of the mineral sector is the Department of Mines and Energy, which is responsible for prescribing appropriate procedures and granting tenements, primarily in the form of permits, licences, and leases.

. The Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology also plays an important role in the mineral sector because of its role in overseeing mineral sector developers’ compliance with the environmental components of the regulatory framework. The Minerals Board advises the Minister for Mines on issuance of mineral permits, licences and leases. The Minerals Board assists with negotiations, determination of access arrangements and fees, and compensation for damage. The provincial government is responsible for granting business licences to development proponents. Loggers must first get development consent from the Ministry of Environment and a logging licence from the Ministry of Forestry.

MESCAL

POWPA

Solomon Islands Code of Logging Practice


NBSAP


National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA)

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)

Pacific Mangroves Initiative

National Solid Waste Management Strategy.

Forests cover 79% of the land in Solomon Islands and are all privately owned. Solomon Islands’ forestry industry faces the challenges of unsustainable logging and the unregulated conversion of forests to other land uses. A decline of harvestable logs has resulted in mining now being seen as the mainstay of the economy.

Climate change and

Legislation specific to disaster impacts is the National Disaster Act.

The National Disaster Act supported by the National Disaster Plan established the




disaster impacts

Other primarily related legislation include the National Disaster Council Act. There is no legislation specific to climate change but related primary legislation includes the Environment Act and Environment Regulations

National Disaster Council (NDC). The NDC is supported by the National Disaster Management Office (NDMO) under the Ministry of Home Affairs. The NDC and NDMO are responsible for disaster preparedness and response. Disaster risk reduction is also the responsibility of the NDC. Data on geological hazards are produced by the Geo Hazards Unit of the Ministry of Mines and Energy. Climate data are produced by the Metrological Division of the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Metrology.

NBSAP


National Disaster Plan

Regional Islands Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Management 2005–2015

Coping with Climate Change in the Pacific Island Region (CCCPIR)

Pacific Island Framework for Action on Climate Change 2006–2015 (PIFACC)

NAPA

CDM

3.5.1 Climate change governance

The Solomon Islands Government is party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change (UNFCCC) and the 2015 Paris Agreement. Additionally, in the Pacific region, the

government is a signatory to the Framework for Pacific Regionalism and the Framework for Resilient

Development in the Pacific (FRDP). At the national level, there is no legislation specific to climate

change, although related legislation includes the Environment Act and Environment Regulations.

There is legislation specific to disaster impacts – the National Disaster Act – while other related

legislation includes the National Disaster Council Act.

The government’s commitment to climate change is demonstrated through the National Climate

Change Policy 2012–2017. The policy, launched in June 2012 by the Ministry of Environment,

Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology (MECDM), was developed by several

Solomon Island government ministries and supporting organisations. The policy provides a

framework for a national approach to addressing the adverse effects of climate change, adaptation,

and achieving sustainable development. The institutional arrangements for the implementation of the

National Climate Change Policy are shown in Figure 3-6. Several other national level documents

address climate change issues, including the Solomon Islands National Development Strategy 2011–

2020 (MDPAC 2011); and the Solomon Islands National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

(Pauku and Lapo 2009).


Figure 3-6 Institutional arrangements for the implementation of the National Climate Change Policy (Source: Rodil and Mias-Cea 2014)

Difficulties to adaptation and mitigation of climate change in Solomon Islands include a lack of

governmental commitment, a lack of policy and institutional framework, poor coordination and links,

a lack of data capacity, and budgetary constraints. The Global Climate Change Alliance1 (GCCA

2012), which leads the Solomon Islands Climate Assistance Program (SICAP), provided an

evaluation of the lessons learned and recommendations gathered from their time in supporting the

implementation of the national climate change policy, as listed below.

Capacities in the Ministry of Environment (particularly in the Climate Change Division) remain

overstretched and addressing these capacity constraints has been slower than anticipated (in

the context of the recruitment freeze of public servants). The appointment of the new

Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Environment (July 2013) has improved the leadership

and momentum of climate change activities in the ministry.

Timely access to general budget support funds has proved difficult for the Ministry of Environment,

with resulting delays in planned activities. The budget allocated to climate change actions is

unknown.

The large number of actors (ministries, donors, NGOs) and broad definition of the ‘climate change’

sector (encompassing adaptation, mitigation, disaster management, environment) poses

challenges for effective coordination.

1 The GCCA is an organisation established by the European Union (EU) in 2007 to strengthen dialogue and cooperation with developing countries, in particular least developed countries (LDCs) and small island developing States (SIDS).


Ownership and leadership by the government, political commitment and an action-oriented matrix

of reform priorities to assess progress and structure the policy dialogue are important success

factors.

The target of drafting appropriate guidelines for managed human resettlement that was included

within SICAP was too ambitious. Human resettlement or relocation is a delicate issue. Cultural

aspects, physical infrastructure (education and health services, elderly care, trauma counselling)

and political concerns are factors that play a role and require consideration and involvement of

wider authorities. It is obviously a lengthy process that should be taken forward holistically.

GCCA’s recommendations:

Ongoing vulnerability assessment to identify and rank affected, high-risk communities according

to risk related criteria. Determining a realistic costing of climate change adaptation measures,

including relocation. Drafting guidelines for human resettlement projects, after nation-wide

consultations, including safeguard standards, to minimise risks of conflict due to resettlement.

Ongoing strengthening of capacity in the Climate Change Division of the Ministry of Environment.

Drafting a matrix of action and deliverables in the climate change sector as a tool for the Ministry

of Environment’s Climate Change Working Group.


4 Current state, trends, drivers of change and environmental consequences

The greatest current threat to ecosystems stem from human activities (SPREP 2016). These threats

include habitat loss; invasive species; urban, agricultural and industrial pollution; and over-

exploitation of natural resources. The direct and indirect effects of climate change and their

interactions with human-induced threats will only intensify the risks to ecosystems.

This sections explores the current state of ecosystems, trends, drivers of change (non-climatic) and

the environmental consequences of these changes at a national level.

4.1 Current state of ecosystems and national trends

As discussed in Section 3.4, Solomon Islands is globally recognised as a biodiversity hotspot, with

extraordinary patterns of inter-island diversity and high degrees of endemism (Filardi et al. 2007;

Conservation International 2013) and the second highest terrestrial biodiversity in the Pacific

(exceeded only by Papua New Guinea). As part of the Coral Triangle, Solomon Islands contributes

to the global centre of marine biodiversity that comprises 76% of the world’s corals and 37% of the

world’s coral reef fish species (TNC 2008).

The SPREP State of Conservation in Solomon Islands – Country Report 2013 (SPREP 2016)

provides a high-level summary of the current state, pressures and threats facing ecosystems and

native species, and trends predicted as of 2013 (see Table 4-1).

Table 4-1 Summary of current state of ecosystems and native species in Solomon Islands (SPREP 2016)

NB: The status of ‘High’ for ‘Pressure and threats’ on ‘Coral reef’ is believed to be incorrectly rated.

Data quality listed in Table 4-1 provides an estimate of the amount and quality of the data that were used

to assess the trend for each indicator.

In Table 4-1, the status of each ecosystem is rated good, fair or poor for its current state and for the

pressures and threats it faces. . A trend for each indicator is then presented and ranges from ‘mixed’,


indicating that some aspects have improved and some have worsened, ‘deteriorating’, indicating the

state of biodiversity has worsened, and ‘improving’, indicating the state of biodiversity has improved.

In terms of the current state of Solomon Island ecosystems, all indicators investigated by SPREP

(2016) were rated as being in a good to fair state. As reflected in the Solomon Islands unique and

high level of biodiversity and endemism, ratings of fair or poor indicate a reduction in ecosystem

biodiversity and habitat. Furthermore, all ecosystem indicators are reported to be deteriorating or

mixed, i.e. some aspects are improving, and some are deteriorating.

The following section provides further information on the current state of Solomon Island ecosystems

and the projected future trends.

4.1.1 Forests

4.1.1.1 Forest types

Solomon Islands has six distinct forest types and approximately 5,000 plant species (Pauku 2009).

The forest types vary in extent across each province, but the species mix is generally uniform

between the islands (Whitmore 1969). The six vegetation types are described below (adapted from

MFEC 1995).

Grassland and other non-forest areas comprise mainly herbaceous species. The predominant

species include Imperata cylindrica, Dicranoptera linearis and Themeda australis. Examples of

commonly occurring species are Mimosa invisa, Morinda citrifolia, Saccharum spontaneum,

Polygala paniculata and Timonius timon. Some of these species (e.g. M. invisa) are also very

common in disturbed areas.

Saline swamp forests are subject to tidal influence as they are found in estuaries and foreshores.

Examples of commonly occurring species are Barringtonia asiatica, Calophyllum inophyllum,

Casuarina equisetifolia, Terminalia catappa, Intsia bijuga, Inocarpus fagifer, Pandanus spp.,

Barringtonia racemosa and species of mangroves.

Freshwater swamp and riverine forests are typically found in poorly drained soil at low altitudes

with little micro-relief. Species such as Inocarpus fagifer, Mextroxylon salomonense, M. sagu,

Barringtonia racemosa are found here, although some important timber species are also present

(e.g. Terminalia brassii and Dillenia salomonensis).

Lowland rainforests include forests at altitudes up to 5 m–70 m, often with complex structure

due to the high number of species in upper or hill forest and patches of freshwater swamp forest.

Natural disasters such as cyclones and human activities often disturb this forest type, as evident

in a high incidence of re-growth and secondary species. Commonly occurring species in this

vegetation are timber species, such as Campnosperma brevipetiolata, Dillenia salomonensis,

Endospermum medullosum, Parinari salomonensis, Terminalia calamansanai, Schizomeria

serrata, Maranthes corymbosa, Pometia pinnata, Gmelina moluccana, Elaeocarpus sphaericus

and Vitex cofasus. Most indigenous fruit trees are also found in this forest, including Canarium

spp, Syzygium malaccensis, Magnifera minor, Spondius dulce, Barringtonia procera, B. edulis,

Artocarpus altilis, Gnetum gnemon, and Burkella obovata.


Hill forests occur at altitudes of 400–600 m and on well-drained soils. They exhibit a complex

structure, with varying tree heights and canopy density. Some species in the lowland forest are

also present here, as well as those species commonly found in the montane forest. Species

forming this forest include Pometia pinnata, Gmelina moluccana, Elaeocarpus sphaericus,

Campnosperma brevipetiolata, Dillenia salomonensis, Endospermum medullosum, Parinari

salomonensis, Terminalia calamansanai, Schizomeria serrata, Maranthes corymbosa, and Vitex

cofasus. Fruit tree species such as Canarium spp., Gnetum gnemon and Artocarpus altilis are

also present.

Montane forests occur at altitudes above 600 m, on ridge tops and mountain summits, but can

be found in lower elevations under harsher conditions. These are characterised by a dense and

compact canopy with small, light tree crowns. Species in this forest type are Callophyllum

kajewskii, Callophyllum pseudovitiense, Eugenia spp., Dacrydium spp., Pandanus spp.,

Racembambos scandens and ferns.

The forest types and their area of coverage (ha) and percentage of land area of each province are

presented in Table 4-2.


Table 4-2 Area coverage of forest types per province (Source: MFEC 1995)

Province Guadalcanal Central Malaita Isabel Western Makira Renbell Temotu

Forest type Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Area (ha)

% land area

Montane 51,204 9.6 174 0.3 6,612 1.6 10,164 2.5 22,044 4.4 11,204 3.5 - - 512 0.6

Hill 401,936 75.1 38,765 61.3 354,544 84.4 325,667 78.7 351,436 69.9 265,466 80.4 23,120 33.1 56,500 65.3

Lowland 58,844 11.0 13,546 21.4 20,144 4.8 17,812 4.3 53,312 10.6 14,996 4.5 2,200 3.1 6,076 7.0

Freshwater and riverine

10,100 1.9 2,700 4.3 10,705 2.5 25,216 6.1 39,888 7.9 9,096 2.8 280 0.4 200 0.2

Saline swamp 1,328 0.2 3,112 4.9 9,992 2.4 17,852 4.3 10,544 2.1 908 0.3 188 0.3 2,504 2.9

Grassland (and other non-forest areas)

10,920 2.0 212 0.3 4,016 1.0 8,215 2.0 18,756 3.7 8,610 2.6 528 0.8 8,172 9.4

The total area presented in Table 4.2 does not match the total area of the country, as not all islands are surveyed and different methods are used (FRIS–ERM-S). Choiseul excludes

Rob Roy and Wagina islands (approximately 15,500 ha).


In 2010, forests covered approximately 77% of Solomon Island’s land area, which is down from 80%

in 1990 (FAO 2010) (Table 4-3). This reduction in forest cover is reported to be mostly non-

commercial forest because the bulk of the commercial forest has now been logged (Pacific Horizon

2008). While most of the lowland area of Solomon Islands has been logged or converted to

plantations, the montane and cloud forests are still relatively intact (ibid).

Table 4-3 Change in forest cover over time in Solomon Islands (SPREP 2016)

Total Land Area (1,000 ha) Forest (1,000 ha) 1990

Forest (1,000 ha) 2000

Forest (1,000 ha) 2005

Forest (1,000 ha) 2010

2,890 2,324 2,268 2,241 2,213

Existing threats to forest cover is dominated by economic activities, including logging and agriculture,

while mining and infrastructure development activities (roads and settlements) currently present less

of a threat (SPREP 2016). The spread of invasive species and natural disasters are also likely to

cause increased levels of forest degradation (ibid). SPREP (2016) rates the current state of forests

as good, while the status of pressures and threats is rated as fair. Trends relating to both the state

of forests and pressures that threaten forests are projected to deteriorate (ibid).

4.1.2 Freshwater ecosystems

Freshwater ecosystems include rivers, lakes, swamps, groundwater and wetland systems. Major

rivers (30-40 km) are present in Choiseul and Guadalcanal, but the most common freshwater habitats

are steep-gradient rocky mountain streams located on all islands (SPREP 2016). Major streams and

rivers typically terminate in long estuaries that form vital nursery habitats for marine fish and

crustaceans (Polhemus et al. 2008). Some areas contain extensive coastal lowlands that support

complex habitats, ranging from tall, closed-canopy freshwater swamp forests to florally diverse

mangrove swamps (SPREP 2016) while a high diversity and endemism exist in freshwater

invertebrates (Polhemus et al. 2008). SPREP (2016) rates the current state of freshwater

ecosystems as good, while the status of pressures and threats is rated as fair.

River, lake and wetland systems are experiencing a reduction in freshwater species richness from

threatening processes such as flow alteration (e.g. logging and commercial plantation activities

causing siltation), barriers (e.g. dam construction), habitat and water quality degradation (due to

siltation), introduction of invasive species (e.g. tilapia, water hyacinth) and overharvesting (ibid).

Trends relating to both the state of freshwater ecosystems and pressures that threaten these

ecosystems are projected to improve in some aspects, and worsen in others (ibid).

4.1.3 Coral reefs

Solomon Islands’ coral reef systems span an area of 575,000 ha (ibid) and includes a diverse range

of reef types, such as narrow fringing reefs, rare double barrier reefs, patch reefs and atolls (Sabetian

and Afzal 2004). Sites surveyed in Turak (2006) indicate that the overall condition of most reefs and

coral communities in Solomon Islands is good, with reef degradation low to moderate at most sites.

Coral communities found in very sheltered inlets in the fjord-like coastlines were unique, had high

species richness, typically contained high living coral cover and in 2006 were generally in good

health, with hard coral cover of between 35 and 45% (ibid). In 2007, however, an earthquake and


tsunami resulted in extensive reef damage and some shallow reefs received irreparable damage.

SPREP (2016) rates the status of the state of coral reefs as fair, while the status of pressures and

threats is rated as good.

SPREP (2016) reports that 71% of Solomon Island reefs are considered to be at medium or higher

threat level from local factors, including: watershed-based pollution/sedimentation from

developments such as mining; vegetation clearance for agriculture and forestry; marine pollution

(ports, oil terminals, shipping channels, agricultural pesticides and fertilizers, sewage from

residential/tourist centres); coastal development (cities, settlements, airports and military bases,

mines, tourist resorts); and destructive fishing and overfishing.

One of the most critical issues facing Solomon Islands and its marine resources is the rapid

population growth rate, coupled with the high dependence on marine resources for ecosystem

services such as food and income (SPREP 2016). If population growth and deforestation continue

at high rates, threats to coral reefs are expected to increase significantly. Trends relating to both the

state of coral reefs and the pressures that threaten coral reefs are projected to deteriorate (ibid).

4.1.4 Mangroves

Mangroves are prevalent throughout Solomon Islands, particularly in the western group of islands.

Mangrove species are dominated by Rhizophora and Bruguiera while Lumnitzera is also common.

Mangroves are of great significance to the livelihoods of many Solomon Island communities and

economies. SPREP (2016) rates the status of the state of mangroves as good, while the status of

pressures and threats is rated as fair.

Unlike terrestrial forests, mangroves have not been commercially exploited to date, but they are

increasingly under threat from conversion to other land uses from urban development and mining

(SPREP 2016). Over-harvesting of mangroves for fuelwood, timber extraction for building materials

and herbal medicines, overharvesting of fish and invertebrate resources, and logging are also major

threats (ibid). Converting mangroves to other land uses and the over harvesting of mangroves

increases coastal erosion, reduces mangrove species richness and threatens fish and invertebrate

spawning grounds. This results in ecosystem changes and affects the provisioning and regulating

ecosystem services that many communities rely on (e.g. habitat for food sources, coastal protection,

water regulation, shelter).

Table 4-4 presents the trend in the decline in mangrove forest cover over time from 1990 to 2010.

Trends relating to both the state of mangroves and the pressures that threaten mangroves are

predicted to improve in some aspects and deteriorate in other areas (ibid).

Table 4-4 Change in mangrove forest in Solomon Islands (FAO 2010)

Mangrove Forest in 1990 (1,000 ha)




53.0 45.5 41.5 37.3


4.1.5 Seagrass

Solomon Islands has an estimated area of 10,000 ha of seagrass beds spread across the coastal

intertidal flats around the country (Sulu et al. 2012). Ten species of seagrass have been recorded in

Solomon Islands (Short et al. 2007; Ellis 2009). Seagrass is of high importance to fish and

invertebrates in the provision of food and nursery grounds, including for endangered species such

as green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) and dugong (Dugong dugon). Seagrass is also of commercial

importance to artisanal fisheries (SPREP 2016). SPREP (2016) rates the status of the state of

seagrass as good, while the status of pressures and threats is rated as fair.

At a local level, seagrass is likely to be affected by coastal development, pollution from inadequate

waste and sanitation management, overharvesting of coral and fisheries, coastal erosion, flooding,

and the sedimentation of rivers due to mining, logging and agricultural activities (ibid). Trends relating

to both the state of seagrass and the pressures that threaten seagrass are projected to improve in

some areas and in others are likely to deteriorate (ibid).

4.1.6 Ocean health

The Pacific Ocean is the largest ecosystem in the world. The coastal and marine environments of

Oceania sustain numerous activities that underpin local, sub-national, national and international

economies and provide livelihoods and food security for millions of people (SPREP 2016). Marine

ecosystems are continually being devastated by habitat destruction, pollution, climate change and

overfishing, with the latter activity believed to be the greatest human-induced threat to ocean health

in the region (ibid). Over-exploitation has reduced many fish stocks throughout the Pacific and

caused ecological shifts that reduce biodiversity and productivity. By-catch during commercial fishing

activities and live capture and harvesting for the aquarium trade contribute to these effects (ibid).

SPREP (2016) rate the status of the state of ocean health as fair, while the status of pressures and

threats is rated as poor.

Human activities that alter the marine environment by affecting water quality, such as sedimentation

from mining or agricultural practices, are likely to make it unsuitable for marine life that require precise

environmental regulation. In addition to oil and gas extraction, most pollution in the ocean originates

from industry, agriculture or domestic sources on land (ibid). Marine invasive species are also an

increasing threat to marine ecosystems. Trends relating to both the state of ocean health and the

pressures that threaten ocean health are projected to deteriorate (ibid).

4.2 Drivers of change

The following section further explores the non-climatic drivers of factors contributing to the change

in ecosystem condition, biodiversity and habitat. In the absence of recent information and data, all

information presented in this section is sourced from Solomon Islands State of the Environment

Report 2008 (SOE 2008) and the SPREP Solomon Island Country Profile and Virtual Environment

Library, unless stated otherwise.

4.2.1 Population pressures

A rapidly increasing population has seen a considerable intensification of land use in Solomon

Islands over the past 30 years. The population estimate in 2014 was approximately 609,800 with an


average annual population growth rate of 2.07% (SPREP 2016). The annual population growth rate

has declined over the last couple of decades; 1986–1999 experienced a 2.8% growth and from 1999–

2009 a lower growth rate of 2.3% was recorded. Based on 2006 statistics, 41.5% of the population

was estimated to be under 15 years old (Solomon Islands National Statistics Office 2006). The high

proportion of young people indicates that the population growth rate will continue to be high, further

increasing population pressures and subsistence use intensification.

Despite a declining growth rate, the population size continues to rapidly increase and is one of the

highest growth rates in the world (SPREP 2016). A population growth scenario for Solomon Islands

based on the average annual population growth rate of 2.07% (2014) is presented in Figure 4-1. It is

estimated that the population will double (1,219,600) by 2048 and reach almost two million by 2070

and almost three million by the end of the century.

Figure 4-1 Projected population estimates for Solomon Islands (2.07% annual growth rate)

Urbanisation is another contributing factor to environmental change, with an estimated 20% of the

population living in urban areas. The annual urban growth rate is 4.7% and if the present trend

continues, 25% of the Solomon Island population will be living in urban areas by 2020 (approximately

152,450 people).

4.2.2 Subsistence use intensification

In the past and in areas of low population density, shifting cultivation maintains soil fertility by means

of long fallow periods,15–25 years, but in many locations, they are typically 5–9 years and as short

as 1–4 years in some places where high population densities exist (e.g. more than ten people per

square km (Mackay 1988). The reduced fallow periods, and often extended cropping periods, have

produced food for the growing population, but this is also resulting in a reduction of soil fertility, with

consequent reduction in crop yields. This is now becoming a major problem in many small islands

(including Wagina Island in Choiseul Province).

Increasing pest and disease issues pose a threat to subsistence food production and are often

associated with more intensive land use. Widespread logging has also reduced potential food garden

-

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

2014 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Po

pu

latio

n

Year


areas in some locations, while a lack of labour due to young population migrating to urban areas is

another issue facing subsistence food production.

The pressure to farm cash crops has driven the introduction of harmful farming practices, such as

extensive land clearing, intensification of land use and inappropriate soil cultivation. The occupation

of most flat arable lands by cash crops is also pushing subsistence cropping onto marginal areas

especially steep lands. About 63% of the total land area (28,000 square km) in Solomon Islands

comprises steep lands (> 20% slope) which are used for shifting cultivation by smallholders.

Intensified and constant cultivation of marginal sloping lands is unsustainable and is responsible for

soil erosion, loss of soil fertility, an increase in pest and diseases, a decline in crop yield, and

widespread land degradation (Cheatle 1987). The SOE report (2008) indicates that there are few, if

any, widespread and quantitative data on soil erosion rates, the extent and severity of land

degradation, the decline in soil fertility, and the sustainability of current cropping systems in Solomon

Islands.

4.2.3 Commercial plantations

Solomon Islands’ agriculture sector exports are largely palm oil, palm kernels, copra and cocoa. They

are key measured contributors to the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). The agriculture sector

accounts for approximately 50% of GDP (SPREP 2013). Copra and cocoa production are dominated

by smallholder production, with average farm size ranging from 0.1 to around 10 ha.

As demonstrated in Section 4.1.1, forests covered approximately 77% of Solomon Islands’ land area

in 2010, which is down from 80% in 1990 (FAO 2010). The conversion of large areas of land, mostly

fertile coastal lands, into commercial plantations, is a significant threat to biodiversity. This form of

land change adds pressure on land resources by displacing domestic food gardening and, if not

managed properly, will pollute river systems and coastal marine ecosystems due to excessive run-

off and siltation during heavy rains. If not properly managed, these all have considerable potential to

affect the country’s rapidly growing population.

4.2.4 Urbanisation

Urbanisation is recognised as one of the principal causes of environmental change. Around 20% of

the population is classified as urban dwellers (2009 census data), of which over 70% reside in the

capital city of Honiara. If the adjoining urban areas of Guadalcanal are included, ‘greater Honiara’

represents 82% of the urban population of Solomon Islands. With an annual urban growth rate of

4.7%, it is anticipated that, by 2020, approximately 25% of the Solomon Island population will be

living in urban areas if the present trend continues (UN-Habitat 2012). The national and urban

population increase is placing severe stress on public services and utility companies, which are

struggling to provide essential services (health and education) and maintain regular supplies (water,

electricity and waste collection services).

4.2.5 Mining

Open-pit mining has been limited to date to the Gold Ridge Mine on Guadalcanal. Open-pit mining

can have a severe impact on the surrounding environment, due to deforestation and earth removal

for the pit and ancillary earthworks, and also on the riverine drainage systems in the area, which are

the potential receiving environment for contaminated run-off.


In July 2015, following Tropical Cyclone Raquel, which brought extreme rainfall to the region, the

Solomon Islands government declared the Gold Ridge Mine a disaster area, with the tailings dam

close to overflowing, resulting in an environmental catastrophe. The unseasonably heavy rain filled

the Gold Ridge tailings dam to within 20 cm of full capacity, which threatened to rupture and result in

arsenic, cyanide and heavy metals-laden tailings to flow downstream and potentially severely affect

residents and ecosystems.

There are no mines currently in operation in Solomon Islands, although there are proposals for new

mines throughout Isabel and Choiseul Provinces, including a proposed bauxite mine on Wagina

Island.

4.2.6 Logging

There are several resources within the environment that are being exploited at unsustainable rates,

but the most pressing is the country’s forest resource. A critical situation exists with the forests of

Solomon Islands; of all activities threatening the terrestrial biodiversity, logging is considered the

leading threat. SPREP (2016) describes the current condition of biodiversity, habitat and ecosystems

as good, while the status of pressures and threats to forests is rated as moderate.

Logging has played a central role in the economy of Solomon Islands for decades. Large scale

commercial wood harvest from primary forests started in the 1960s and, until the 1980s, most logging

took place on state land (Kabutaulaka 2000, 2006). Beginning in the early 1980s, exploitation shifted

to customary land (which makes up approximately 90% of the total land area in Solomon Islands).

An influx of multinational companies followed and the number of logging licences issued increased

rapidly (TEEBcase 2012).

By the mid-1990s, timber exports contributed to approximately half the country’s export revenue and

a third of government revenue (Montgomery 1995; Fraser 1997). The sustainable harvest rate for

Solomon Islands was estimated to be 325,000 cubic metres per year, but in the 1990s, actual logging

rates reached double this amount (or 700,000 cubic metres per year) (Kabutaulaka 2000, 2006). The

timber harvest increased to 1 million cubic metres in 2004, which equates to four times the

sustainable harvest levels (SPREP 2016). Although the amount of timber exported continued to

increase, government revenues decreased. Between 2002 and 2005, exports doubled while the

contribution of logging revenue to government income fell from 16% in 2002 to 13% in 2004 (Tokaut

2006). SPREP (2016) estimates that forest cover has reduced by 4% from 1990 to 2013 (an

additional 1% reduction from the 2010 figures presented in Section 4.1.1). The annual log export

production for each province is outlined in Table 4-5 below, noting the forest coverage for each

province previously presented in Table 4-2. Small-scale logging (for the local market) may be higher

around major population centres, especially Honiara. However, given the scale and locations of

logging for the export market, there is not necessarily an overall spatial link at the national scale

between population densities and rates of deforestation from logging. Rather, the extent of logging

in each province is more driven by the interaction between factors such as existing resource

availability (i.e. forest cover) and resource access (i.e. landowner permissions).


Table 4-5 Annual summary of log export production by province (Source: Pauku 2009)

4.2.7 Fishing and marine exports

Most marine ecosystems such as mangroves, lagoons and reefs are also being over-exploited in

many areas. While population growth is responsible for additional pressure on these ecosystems

throughout the country, commercial extraction is worsening these effects in many cases. In Oceania,

an estimated 70–80% of the catch from inshore fisheries is used for subsistence purposes, while

around 20% is going to markets (SPREP 2016). In 2008, an Asian Development Bank (ADB) project

examined several studies on coastal fishing in Solomon Islands and estimated the annual catch for

commercial production during the mid-2000s to be 3,250 tonnes, worth USD 3,307,190 and the

subsistence fisheries at 15,000 tonnes, worth USD 10,980,393.

Continued over-harvesting is further undermining the resilience of ocean systems, while fisheries

management is failing to halt the decline of key species and damage to marine ecosystems (ibid).

SPREP (2016) reports that there was a significant deterioration of the quality of governance in the

fisheries sector by the government and donors to strengthen fisheries institutions during the period

of ethnic tension.

4.2.8 Pollution

Many households in the country do not have access to water supply systems and still rely on streams

and rivers to obtain water for drinking and domestic purposes (e.g. washing and bathing). Pollution

from both solid waste and sanitation and sewerage discharges is the major existing threat to

waterways throughout Solomon Islands. Poor community awareness or attitudes, a high reliance on

plastic as opposed to biodegradable or reusable products, and the lack of adequate waste collection

and disposal services throughout most of the country, result in excessive disposal and accumulation

of solid wastes to rivers and streams. Additional pollution inputs directly to rivers and streams include

contaminants from sanitation uses, industrial discharges, agricultural run-off, and watershed run-off

(e.g. sediment inputs). These pose human health risks through the community’s use of this

ecosystem type, both directly (e.g. drinking, swimming) and indirectly (e.g. consumption of

contaminated food). They also undermine the integrity and resilience of ecosystem components in


the rivers and streams (i.e. flora, fauna and their habitats), as well as of downstream marine

ecosystems.

Pollution to the coastal and marine environment stems from two main sources: (a) land-based

sources and through rivers and streams; and (b) marine-based sources. For example, in Honiara

alone, at least 75% of sewage flows through a piped collection system directly into the sea without

treatment. Discharges from ships in the form of garbage, bilge water and other pollutants are also a

major source of sea-based pollution. An increase in these forms of pollution is already a concern as

more ships are coming into and using the country’s harbours and waters. Local ships are also

contributing to these forms of pollution.

4.2.9 Energy production and use

The majority of energy use in Solomon Islands is biomass for cooking and for drying copra and cocoa

for export. However, the accessible fuelwood is increasingly scarce in some areas. For some parts

of the country, the major fuelwoods for copra drying is mangrove, and its overuse is now a major

contributing factor to coastal erosion.

4.3 Environmental consequences

The drivers of change and root causes outlined above have a significant effect on ecosystems and

ecosystem services. In line with the drivers of change and root causes outlined in the SOE 2008

report, the consequences of these changes are explored and summarised below. Threats to specific

ecosystems types are then explored further as part of this ESRAM study (see Section 5).

4.3.1 Freshwater stress

Freshwater resources are under stress, as indicated below.

Erosion and sedimentation of stream and river systems from logging operations, subsistence

cultivation on sloping lands and land clearing for plantations affect water quality and thus degrade

reefs, mangrove areas and coastal fisheries. There is poor understanding amongst loggers and

communities of the effects of land-clearing, logging, erosion and run-off on downstream and

receiving environments including reefs and fisheries.

Flow alteration, barriers, habitat and water quality degradation, introduction of invasive species

and over-harvesting are resulting in a decline in freshwater species richness (SPREP 2016).

Indiscriminate land-clearing for subsistence food production and for plantation and commercial

logging is resulting in catchment drying. In 2008, the Honiara water supply source saw a 50%

drop in water availability in the catchment.

Pollution problems in river catchments are also increasing with rapid population growth, reflecting

inadequate planning to control development in catchments and conflicting regulatory decisions,

such as the granting of development rights and logging licenses in catchment or conservation

areas.

The cumulative effects of these threats are intensifying the risk of extinctions, with several

endemic fish species reported in the IUCN Red List as threatened, and are compromising the

sustainable use of freshwater ecosystems by local communities (SPREP 2016).


4.3.2 Soil stress and degradation

Serious soil stress is experienced through low crop yield and high incidence of pests and diseases.

As land is degraded, it becomes a haven for invasive species due to the diminished ability of the

ecosystem to control them. Invasive species in turn affect the soil-nutrient moisture regimes of

catchments, leading to poor soil structures and further fertility decline. Most of the accessible soils

have fertility and/or micronutrient deficiencies and increased exposure results in soil leaching and

erosion, with great impact on soil quality and subsequently low crop yield. Soil degradation reduces

food security by reducing not only the quantity of food produced but also its nutritional quality, which

is critical to human health (FAO 2011).

4.3.3 Forest depletion

Due to the depletion of forests, communities are finding it increasingly difficult to access good quality

water and forest products and materials for housing and food, which are important for village well-

being and livelihoods. Much of the deforestation over large tracts of land occurs on very steep land.

Serious erosion, siltation, soil structure decline and loss of soil fertility threaten terrestrial and marine

biodiversity, provisioning services such as renewable water supplies, and regulating services such

as and pollution and water quality regulation. The production potential of the land is also heavily

diminished. Highly invasive weeds further threaten disturbed forest areas and increase soil

degradation.

Existing threats to forest cover are dominated by logging and agriculture, while mining and

infrastructure development pose less of a threat. Based on the forest cover estimates presented in

Table 4-3 for 1990, 2000, 2005 and 2010, a forest clearing scenario is presented in Figure 4-2. The

scenario is based on a five-year clearing rate estimated at 1.2%.

Forest management and governance practices have been poor, due to corruption and the lack of

technical and human resources to conduct and monitor logging operations (TEEBcase 2012). The

significant dependence of the national economy on timber exports was also a driver of continued

deforestation. Poor forestry practices not only cause the loss of biodiversity and other ecosystem

services, but also excessive soil erosion, silting of rivers and degradation of adjacent coral reefs due

to sedimentation.


Figure 4-2 Projected forest clearing rates for Solomon Islands

4.3.4 Loss of biodiversity

Land and marine-based activities, including agriculture, forestry and mining, exert pressure on the

terrestrial environment and are leading to a loss of biodiversity, an increase in invasive species, land

degradation and contamination of marine and freshwater environments. Inappropriate land use,

deforestation activities, pollution and over-harvesting of marine resources is resulting in a continued

loss of biodiversity. The loss of biodiversity affects potential income generation from tourism and

related activities, while Fisher et al. (2014) reports that regulating services are at risk, as the oceans’

capacity to regulate climate is dependent on their biodiversity. The loss of biodiversity is generally

considered irreversible.

4.3.5 Fish stock depletion and coral reef degradation

While population growth is responsible for additional pressure on these ecosystems almost

everywhere, in many cases commercial extraction is worsening these effects. Over-exploitation for

both subsistence and commercial use has resulted in severe depletion of several important food and

commercial species. These include green snails, blacklip and goldlip shells, coconut crabs, giant

clam and sandfish (sea cucumber). Other species such as trochus, crayfish/lobster and turtles are

also threatened, despite being under some form of protection (regulation).

This pattern of overuse and non-existent or inadequate regulation limits the productivity of inshore

fisheries to provide much needed protein in the population’s diet, as well as preventing ongoing,

reliable income-generation from marine product exports. Natural disasters such as cyclones,

earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and tidal waves, greatly affect coastal environments and cause

physical destruction and the alteration of the ecosystem, which has the capacity to destroy

endangered species and the coral reefs itself.

1,700

1,800

1,900

2,000

2,100

2,200

2,300

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Fo

rest C

ove

r (h

a)

Year


The 2015 coastal fisheries report card (SPC 2015) reports that significant losses of coral reefs,

mangroves, seagrasses and intertidal habitats, all of which provide shelter and food for coastal

marine fauna, are expected to cause reductions in the productivity of coastal fisheries due to climate

change, threatening food security and livelihoods.


5 National ecosystems and ecosystem services

This chapter presents the results of the ecosystems and ecosystem services identification

component of the national ESRAM study. Subsequent ESRAM components (ecosystem valuations

and climate change vulnerability assessment) are presented in Chapter 6 and Chapter 7.

This chapter provides a national overview to set the scene (Section 5.1), a summary of the key

ecosystems and ecosystem services (Section 5.2), followed by more detailed descriptions of the

services and threats associated with each key ecosystem (Section 0 to Section 5.14).

5.1 National overview

The ecosystem services across Solomon Islands are diverse and extensive. They continue to play

an important role in defining and maintaining the livelihoods, subsistence and cultural identities of

Solomon Islanders, particularly the rural communities, who are largely dependent on subsistence

gardening and fishing, and rely on their surrounding environment for resources such as shelter

(Filardi et al. 2007; Pauku and Lapo 2009). The high proportion of rural residents means that most

of the population interacts with and relies on several ecosystem services every day. Additionally, this

means that much of the population is potentially vulnerable to changes in the condition of ecosystems

and ecosystem services.

The abovementioned livelihood and subsistence of rural communities (i.e. through fishing and

gardening) are wholly dependent on the combination of: i) the ecosystem processes that sustain

gardens and fisheries; and ii) sustainable use of these natural resources. Likewise, with the exception

of mining, the country’s major industries (timber, copra, palm oil, commercial fisheries) are directly

dependent on ecosystem services, requiring sufficiently fertile, intact and watered land, and intact

freshwater and marine habitats, if the industries are to persist sustainably.

Table 5-1 Examples of typical community reliance on local ecosystem resources

Ecosystem Ecosystem Service (in terms of examples of direct community uses)

Marine Marine products harvested for community consumption or trade/sale: reef and pelagic fish (e.g. coral trout, silverfish, snapper, sweetlips, surgeon fish, trevally, parrotfish, kingfish, dolphinfish, bonito, tuna, shark, barracuda, wahoo, sailfish and marlin), trochus, shark fin, turtles, eels, crayfish, clams, beche-de-mer, octopus and limpets

Forest Construction materials: timber (Gymnostoma papuana, Xanthostemon melanoxylon), ropes for house building (Flagelaria indica)

Decoration and kastom clothing (Gleichenia linearis, Antiaris toxicara), dying handicrafts (Melastoma affine)

Pesticides (Selaginella rechingeri)

Food such as fruits, pigs and other hunted fauna

Medicinal products (Gnetum gnemon, Pandanus spp, Cocos spp.)

Firewood (Timonius timon and various mangrove species)

Calophyllum timber for building canoes

Gardens and plantations (i.e. modified terrestrial habitat in the form of domestic crops and

Products harvested for community consumption or trade/sale: coconut, Colocasia and Cyrtosperma taros, manioc, banana, breadfruit, papaya,

tobacco, sweet potato, yam, sago, pumpkin, watermelon, sugar cane, fruit trees (e.g. Burckella obovata, Malay apple), Tahitian chestnut, canarium almond, turmeric, cocoa, cordyline, areca nut, other fruits and Piper betle.


Ecosystem Ecosystem Service (in terms of examples of direct community uses)

commercial agriculture)

Plantations such as coconut, palm oil, cocoa, coffee

Other terrestrial Pandanus, mangroves and coconuts (leaves for sleeping mats, edible fruit, handicrafts and medicinal)

Coconut crab

Springs, streams and groundwater

Water provision for drinking water in particular, but also for washing, bathing, cooking, etc.

5.2 Key ecosystems and ecosystem services

This assessment identified the following 12 categories as the key ecosystems in Solomon Islands in

terms of the provision of ecosystem services to the population on a national scale.

(1) Rivers and streams

(2) Terrestrial forests, vegetation

(3) Cultivated land (plantations and gardens).

(4) Mountains and highlands

(5) Other terrestrial land

(6) Coral reefs

(7) Coastline / Beach

(8) Mangroves

(9) Sea / Ocean

(10) Wetlands / Lakes / Swamps

(11) Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaweed)

(12) Groundwater

Note that some ecosystem categories are broad (e.g. terrestrial forest), whereas others are quite

specific (e.g. seagrass). This distinction is associated with the need in some cases to highlight the

specific ecosystem services provided by a particular component of what might otherwise often be

classified as part of a broader ecosystem (e.g. a seagrass bed might also be considered to be a part

of a broader nearshore or seabed marine ecosystem).

The key ecosystem services associated with each of these ecosystems are listed in Table 5-2.

Most of them are derived, in general terms, from multiple ecosystem types ( Table 5-2). For

example, terrestrial forests, cultivated land and marine ecosystems (i.e. coral reefs, mangroves,

seagrass, ocean) all contribute to primary productivity and nutrient cycling. Similarly, coastal

protection services can be associated with beach, reef and mangrove ecosystems.

Ecosystems were also typically recognised as contributing to numerous ecosystem services. The

main exception to this was groundwater, which was only recognised for providing water (i.e. drinking

water etc.). Groundwater provides other ecosystem services, such as maintaining groundwater-

dependent ecosystems/habitats (i.e. groundwater fed wetlands, caves, etc.). However, this


assessment focuses only on key ecosystem services in the context of direct benefits to the human

population.

Despite their high value, contributions of essential ecosystem services to the people of Solomon

Islands, the ecosystems are subject to significant anthropogenic stressors and threats (i.e. human-

derived pressures and degradation). In fact, most of the main existing threats of concern to

ecosystems are directly brought about by human activities (see Section 4.2). This contrasts with

future climate-related threats, which are typically indirect effects transpiring as legacy issues from

past human activities affecting the global climate.

Understanding and addressing existing threats is a core feature of EbA. This is because a crucial

adaptation option in EbA is to ameliorate existing threats (i.e. improve ecosystem health or

functioning) in order to build the resilience of an ecosystem to future climate change. In terms of

existing threats to ecosystems or ecosystem services at the national scale, major threats include

commercial logging, commercial inshore fishing, industrial agriculture such as oil palm plantations,

land-use change and habitat loss through urbanisation and the expansion of agricultural land,

construction of urban infrastructure, and mining (Roughan and Wara 2010; Peterson et al. 2012;

Furusawa et al. 2014). These threats are exacerbated by the nation’s rapid rate of population growth

and ongoing climate change (Walter and Hamilton 2014).

Further descriptions of the main services and threats associated with each ecosystem category are

provided in the following sections.


Table 5-2 Key ecosystems and ecosystem services identified for Solomon Islands

Ecosystems Key Ecosystem Services Identified during the National Workshop

Rivers, streams

Source of food directly and indirectly (irrigation)

Water source (drinking and domestic use)

Recreation (swimming, canoe)

Transportation, anchorage

Provision of building and cooking material (gravel, sand, stones)

Energy generation (hydropower)

Cultural significance (e.g. mark boundaries)

Sanitation uses

Waste/rubbish disposal

Fisheries / aquaculture

Irrigation source and agricultural activities

Habitat provision, biodiversity

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation

Provision of housing material (timber, leaves)

Fauna habitat

Gardening and farming (commercial and subsistence)

Kastom medicine

Source of income/revenue (SIG and private commodities – logging)

Fuel (firewood)

Carbon sequestration

Nutrient cycling and primary productivity

Maintain intact watershed (soil retention and fertility)

Air regulator, oxygen supply

Protection from hazards/risks (?)

Recreation and tourism (cycling, hiking, bird watching)

Cultural significance – ornaments, practices, costumes

Shade / cool atmosphere)

Handicrafts

Tools

Food source (hunting and plant-based foods)

Regulate water cycle

Other Terrestrial Land

Agriculture, food production

Support forests

Minerals source (mining industry)

Land provision (habitats, human settlements and developments)

Regulator for temperature, nutrient, water

Commercial value (security and collateral)

Provides means of identity and heritage

Coral reefs Habitat / biodiversity

Food source

Coastal protection / wave break

Income source and revenue (fish, corals, lime, etc.)

Fishing grounds (subsistence, commercial)

Lime extraction

Building and construction materials (coral rock)

Traditional values (shell money, decorations, ornaments, turtles)

Recreation and leisure

Kastom medicine

Tourism industry

Support marine food chain

Coastline / Beach

Recreation/leisure

Sanitation

Domestic use (bathing)

Jewellery (e.g. shells, stones, corals for income and cultural use)

Building materials (sand)

Transport (boat landing area, storage for canoes and vessels)

Fauna habitat (e.g. nesting ground for turtles)


Ecosystems Key Ecosystem Services Identified during the National Workshop

Protection from coastal inundation

Mangroves Source of food

Building materials

Breeding grounds

Fuel source (firewood)

Coastal protection, shoreline stabilisation, buffer

Kastom medicine

Recreation

Sanitation

Habitat, biodiversity, nursery grounds


Craft materials and dye

Tools (gardening) and weapons

Shell money source

Income / revenue source

Sea / Ocean Transportation

Habitat

Food source

Regulator of temperature/air

Income source (both commercial, SIG and small scale)

Mountains Building materials

Habitat (particularly for endemic species – high biodiversity value)

Support rivers (source of headwaters)

Regulate climate and weather

Safety from disasters (e.g. high ground)

Navigation land marks

Wetlands / Lakes / Swamps

Food source

Water source (drinking, domestic)

Habitat (incl. fauna breeding sites)

Transport

Building materials

Aquaculture

Heritage

Environmental filtration and water purification

Reduce flood flow rates

Tourism (birdwatching)

Seagrass and macroalgae (seaweeds)

Habitat (e.g. turtles, dugong)

Food source (e.g. Caulerpa spp.)

Income generation (commercial seaweed farming)

Kastom medicine

Stabilises coastal environments

Groundwater Water source (drinking and domestic use)

Source commercial bottled water (spring water)

Plantations and Gardens

Source of income and employment/livelihoods

Food source


Table 5-3 Summary of ecosystem sources for key ecosystem services

Ecosystems

Fo

od

(la

nd

)

Fo

od

(sea,

river)

Wate

r (d

rin

kin

g)

Wate

r (o

the

r)

Bu

ild

ing

an

d h

ou

seh

old

m

ate

rials

Fu

el

and e

ne

rgy

Oth

er

mate

rials

, la

nd

,

min

era

ls

Cu

ltu

ral and t

rad

itio

nal

valu

es

Tra

ns

po

rt, n

avig

ati

on

Waste

dis

po

sal

and

san

itati

on

Hab

itat

and b

iod

ivers

ity

Ind

us

try a

nd c

om

merc

e

(in

co

me a

nd r

even

ue

)

Me

dic

ine

Recre

ati

on

and t

ou

rism

Carb

on

seq

ue

str

ati

on

Co

asta

l p

rote

cti

on

Nu

trie

nt

cyclin

g a

nd

pri

mary

pro

du

cti

vit

y

Safe

ty (

sh

ad

e,

tsu

na

mi,

ha

zard

s)

Reg

ula

te c

lim

ate

, air

, w

ate

r

cycle

, te

mp

.

Reg

ula

te w

ate

r q

ua

lity

Reg

ula

te w

ate

r fl

ow

rate

s

Rivers, streams


Other Terrestrial Land

Coral Reefs

Coastline / Beach

Mangroves

Sea / Ocean

Mountains


Seagrass and macroalgae (seaweeds)

Groundwater



5.3 Rivers and streams

Rivers and streams, including both freshwater and tidal systems, occur throughout Solomon Islands,

particularly on the large islands, which have major rivers and watershed areas. The main exception

is many of the very small and/or atoll type islands, where the topography does not support river or

stream systems. Such waterways, and the ecosystems services they provide, are highly valued by

the people of Solomon Islands, such that the majority of settlements are located adjacent, or in close

proximity, to these ecosystems.

The ecosystem services provided by rivers and streams are many and varied, with the main services

from a community perspective including:

provision of water for drinking, domestic uses (i.e. bathing, laundry, cooking), industrial and

irrigation needs;

provision of food for both subsistence and commercial purposes (e.g. fish, eels, molluscs/shells,

crustaceans, kangkung);

support for both local and commercial fisheries, including aquaculture (e.g. tilapia aquaculture);

provision of opportunities for recreation and leisure (e.g. swimming, canoeing);

support for biodiversity, food sources and local flora and fauna through the provision of a range

of aquatic habitats;

provision of a means of transportation and travel, as well as storage (anchorage) for supporting

vessels;

provision of raw materials for building and cooking material (e.g. gravel, sand, motu stones);

provision of a means of energy generation through hydro-power (e.g. Tina River Hydro Project);

provision of various cultural values, depending on the location and local kastom (e.g. designate

boundaries, baptisms, source of ornamental and handicraft materials); and

provision of a conduit for waste disposal and dispersal, particularly for sanitation and household

waste.

Together, the provision of river/stream derived food, water and sanitation disposal services are

extremely high value services at a national scale. Adaptation to maintain these services in the face

of climate change would be considered a high priority at a national scale, especially at locations

where settlements are large or vulnerable, and highly dependent on local waterways.

Despite providing high value ecosystem services, rivers and streams are subject to major

disturbances and degradation from development and pollution. Most of these threats persist

throughout the nation.

The primary existing threats can generally be classified as developments, pollution, extraction and

other threats, as follows:

development – including instream, bank side and watershed developments, such as settlement

development, mining, infrastructure, urbanisation;


pollution – from household sanitation and solid waste disposal, commercial and industrial inputs,

run-off from farming and catchment development (i.e. pesticide, fertiliser and sediment loads),

mining discharges, logging-related run-off (especially sediment loads from cleared land), vessel

inputs (e.g. fuel and oil spills);

extraction activities, such as gravel extraction, fishing and aquaculture, particularly where these

activities are undertaken on a commercial scale; and

other threats such as habitat modification and disturbance (e.g. bank revetment works), flooding

and extreme high rainfall events, slash and burn practices in close vicinity to waterways, invasive

species (e.g. tilapia Oreochromis spp., water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes), and growing human

populations placing increasing pressure on waterway resources.

5.4 Wetlands, lakes and swamps

Enclosed fresh or brackish water bodies and swamps are common throughout Solomon Islands.

Swamp areas may support various vegetation types, such as freshwater swamp forest, herbaceous

swamps, sago swamp forest, and swamp with cultivated crops. At the community level and on a day-

to-day basis, wetlands and lakes are most highly valued for their role in providing food and food

security. Overall key ecosystem services associated with this ecosystem include:

provision of food – commonly used for cultivation of swamp taro (Cyrtosperma merkusii), taro

(Colocasia esculenta), sago palm Metroxylon sagu, fishing and aquaculture activities (e.g. fishing

for freshwater eels, aquaculture of tilapia Oreochromis spp. and milkfish Chanos chanos) at both

local subsistence and commercial scales;

environmental and natural hazard regulation, such as filtration and purification of run-off from

watersheds, and reducing flood flow rates;

provision of aquatic fauna habitat and support of biodiversity, including value as critical habitat for

migratory bird species;

provision of raw materials (i.e. traditional building materials, reeds for weaving);

support of tourism activities (e.g. bird watching) and

provision of opportunities for transport and research, and provides links with cultural heritage.

Pollution, development, habitat modification and increased population growth are the main existing

threats to the capacity of wetlands and lakes to continue to provide the above ecosystem services to

communities. In some respects, wetlands and lakes are more prone to the effects of existing threats

than are rivers and streams. This is because wetlands and lakes are often comparatively small in

size (and therefore smaller relative to a given development or other threat), and have longer water

retention times (i.e. lower capacity to flush pollutants). Key existing threats to this ecosystem type

can be summarised as:

pollution from household and commercial waste disposal (including sanitation), run-off from

agriculture and watershed development, and mining discharges;


developments such as wetland reclamation, as well as logging and developments in the

watershed (i.e. causing direct disturbance through habitat loss and/or indirect disturbance via

pollutant inputs);

existing climatic effects through droughts and floods (i.e. loss of habitat and fauna) and

other threats such as human population growth (i.e. increasing both pollutant inputs and extraction

pressures) and invasive species (e.g. cane toad Rhinella marina, tilapia Oreochromis spp., water

hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes).

5.5 Terrestrial forests / vegetation

This broad ecosystem captures the majority of the land area in Solomon Islands, specifically any

vegetated land, excluding cultivated or otherwise developed land (i.e. plantations, built areas etc.).

In 2010, forest covered approximately 77% of the land area of Solomon Islands (SPREP 2016). Most

terrestrial vegetation is classified as varying types of forest, dominated by rainforest vegetation types

(e.g. rainforest, lowland rainforest, degraded rainforest, etc.). Other vegetation types, such as

grasslands also occur.

Important ecosystem services are provided not only from the vegetation directly but also from the

fauna – and products thereof – that inhabit terrestrial ecosystems. Communities rely on vegetated

land for raw materials (e.g. building materials, firewood) and food on a daily basis, and also

acknowledge their dependence on many other ecosystem services associated with the vegetated

terrestrial environment around them. Examples of forest uses by communities include: construction

timber (Gymnostoma papuana, Xanthostemon melanoxylon), ropes for house building (Flagelaria

indica), decoration and kastom clothing (Gleichenia linearis), dyeing handicrafts (Melastoma affine),

pesticides (Selaginella rechingeri), food (Finschia spp.), medicinal (Gnetum gnemon) and firewood

(Timonius timon) (Morrison et al. 2007).

Overall, key ecosystem services include:

provision of raw materials for building, fuel and commercial purposes, particularly timber and

thatching/weaving materials (i.e. materials for housing and household items, firewood, round log

export, canoe trees, such as the kerosene tree);

provision of food (i.e. hunting grounds, nuts such as the nglai nut from canarium indicum,

traditional fruits and vegetables);

provision of kastom medicine, and support of cultural items, practices and heritage (e.g. traditional

tools, ornaments, costumes, weaving, handicrafts and traditional currency); examples of

important resources in this regard include pandanus, reeds, feathers, shells, bark, coconut shells

and seeds;

environmental regulation of local environment and atmosphere by way of providing shade, cooler

areas and oxygen;

provision and regulation of environmental processes and functions such as primary productivity,

nutrient cycling, soil fertility and carbon sequestration;


provision of opportunities for recreation, sport, leisure and tourism (e.g. hiking, bird watching), as

well as scientific research pursuits;

means of generating income and revenue (e.g. logging);

provision of fauna habitat (e.g. birds, insects, wildlife) and support of biodiversity;

provision of landmarks (e.g. for navigation) and trees that can mark other important areas such

as land ownership boundaries; and

provision of soil stability and hazard protection for communities (e.g. landslides, erosion, wind or

weather breaks).

Logging is arguably one of the most destructive existing threats to terrestrial forests and their

inhabitant flora and fauna communities in Solomon Islands. As stated by Filardi et al. (2007):

There is increasing pressure on forest systems to provide cash for landholding communities with

little access to alternatives for school fees, medical care and other basic services. The civil unrest

of the early 2000’s and accompanying economic hardship escalated large-scale unregulated

logging, with devastating ecological effects.

Extensive logging of lowland and hill forests, and subsequent land-clearing for copra and oil palm

plantations, have devastated much of the easily accessible forest (Filardi et al. 2007). Isabel, in

particular, has been subject to widespread and unregulated logging, with the only remaining tracts

of intact forest on its most eastern and western ends (Filardi et al. 2007). Despite extensive

degradation, there remain fragments of pristine forest, especially further inland and at higher altitudes

(Filardi et al. 2007; Pollard et al. 2014).

In addition to the direct loss of forest vegetation, logging also has indirect consequences, such as

the loss of important trees integral to the livelihoods of forest-dependent human communities, threats

to clean running water, loss of biodiversity, and threats to marine life via sediment run-off (Morrison

et al. 2007).

Other existing threats to this ecosystem and its services are numerous and may vary significantly

between locations. In a general sense, the most significant threats are described below.

Logging and deforestation, particularly at locations where logging activity is intensive and/or

widespread. Upland logging has been extensive and ongoing in the region for last 30 years, with

most of the upland area from the coast to 400 m elevation licensed to logging companies at one

time or another during this period (Halpern et al. 2013). Other industries such as mining and

agriculture may cause deforestation, noting that there are currently numerous proposals for new

mines (especially for tenements throughout Isabel and Choiseul Provinces). Deforestation is also

undertaken to improve land for the expansion of settlements (i.e. urban encroachment),

plantations and other agriculture (e.g. slash and burn agricultural) practices, which occurs at both

subsistence and commercial scales.

Unsustainable harvesting – harvesting of plant species and local wildlife such as giant rats and

possums as bush meat (Morrison et al. 2007), together with human population growth and

increased cash-based needs (i.e. rising food and education costs), result in over-harvesting and

further exploitation and/or destruction of terrestrial forests.


Pollution, particularly from the use of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals on the land,

sanitation uses (which also create a human health risk), and illegal waste disposal.

Existing climate related threats such as bush fires, droughts, cyclones, alternating climate cycles

(i.e. El Niño and La Niña cycles) and other natural disasters. Frequent deforestation occurs as

result of cyclones, earthquakes, landslides and volcanism (Mayr and Diamond 2001).

Invasive species – The Pacific Island Ecosystem at Risk (PIER) project lists over 150 invasive

and potentially invasive species threatening terrestrial ecosystems in Solomon Islands. Key

invasive species of concern include: feral pigs, rats, cats and dogs; insects such as fire ants

(Wasmannia auropunctata), black twig borer, and fruit flies; cane toads (Rhinella marina); and

invasive plants such as Merremia peltata, Browsonaetia papyrifera, and mimosa weed Mimosa

sp. (Filardi et al. 2007). Note also that reforestation efforts on cleared lands often use introduced

species of Eucalyptus (Morrison et al. 2007).

Illegal wildlife trade – native wildlife (e.g. birds, snakes and possums), including species of high

conservation value, are commonly captured and sold in the illegal wildlife trade (Morrison et al.

2007; Pikacha et al. 2012).

Other threats such as poor governance or poor coordination between jurisdictions for

management, lack of awareness among the community about forest values, recovery and

sustainable management.

5.6 Mountains (highlands / cloud forests)

Mountains and their montane cloud forests are a high-altitude sub-category of terrestrial forest. In

this sense, they provide many of the same ecosystem services (and are subject to many of the same

threats) as those described above for terrestrial forests (Section 5.5). However, they are commonly

perceived as a separate ecosystem type with discrete values worth highlighting, in part due to both

altitude related factors and their often unique biodiversity values. These are briefly addressed below.

Montane cloud forests descend to approximately 1200 m above sea level on Guadalcanal and

Kolombangara, 650 m on Vangunu and Makira, and to 600 m on Gatakae (Filardi et al. 2007). Note

that these elevations are somewhat unique (i.e. they only descend to 2000 m above sea level in

neighbouring Papua New Guinea) due to small island effects on climate (Filardi et al. 2007). At high

elevations, the forests are situated within a zone shrouded by cloud on most days; trees are stunted,

decreasing forest height; trunks and branches are gnarled and draped with moss and ferns; the

canopy is more open; and palm and pandana are plentiful (Hadden 1981; Filardi et al. 2007).

Montane cloud forests in Solomon Islands are recognised for their high biodiversity value because

they: i) support high altitude species that do not occur in other ecosystems; and ii) often contain

endemic species. These montane ecosystems often give rise to endemic species because they

essentially comprise isolated high altitude ‘islands’ within the terrestrial landscape.

These high altitude ecosystems tend to be most valued for the following ecosystem services:

provision of raw materials (trees) for building materials;

support for biodiversity, particularly by providing habitat for endemic species;


provision of the headwaters (i.e. water source) for downstream waters;

regulating local climate and weather;

provision of hazard protection and safety from disasters (e.g. high ground, physical barrier against

weather); and

supporting navigation (i.e. natural landmarks).

While the threats identified in Section 5.5 are broadly applicable here also, the most relevant existing

threats (in terms of the above-mentioned ecosystem services) include logging and deforestation,

mining proposals, and invasive species. Even where logging does not occur directly within a montane

area, logging of adjacent hills and lowlands can continue to cause environmental effects on lands at

higher elevations. Firstly, with the loss of lowland and hill forests, communities are forced to rely

more heavily on montane forests for ecosystem services (e.g. provision of building materials) that

would normally be provided by forests at lower elevations. Secondly, land clearing appears to cause

shifts in local microclimates along altitudinal gradients (i.e. along the lowland to montane forest

gradient), such that some otherwise intact montane environments are being degraded due to

microclimate shifts (Filardi et al. 2007). Other edge effects associated with the deforestation of

adjacent (lowland/hill) ecosystems may also be an issue, such as exposed montane forests

potentially being more vulnerable to infiltration by weed species.

Tourism is an additional threat that has been identified since the mountains are targeted for

ecotourism pursuits, such as trekking and bird watching. The mountains generally cover a

comparatively small spatial area and have fewer residents compared to lowland and hilly terrains, so

tourism and its effects may be more prominent.

5.7 Other terrestrial land

This ecosystem category has been included to capture any terrestrial lands that would not typically

be considered to be vegetated or cultivated land (i.e. forests, plantations, etc.). It includes built-up

areas, such as settlements, urban areas, industrial and commercial precincts, and the locations of

infrastructure. While inherently highly modified or disturbed by definition, this category is important

from a human perspective, as it is where the majority of the population of Solomon Islands reside

and spend most of their time.

Non-forested or otherwise vegetated lands provide areas for housing, development, businesses,

administrative buildings, and services, such as schools, police stations, hospitals, landfill and

transport services (e.g. airports). Land has commercial value (e.g. security and collateral). It also

provides a means of identity and heritage for people.

As a source of minerals, land in general (regardless of whether it is vegetated or not) also has value

to the mining industry.

Despite the above values, this category is not considered to provide much in the way of ecosystem

services, given its highly modified nature and particularly when compared to ecosystems in a more

natural state. That being said, it is acknowledged that the greener areas of this landscape (e.g. urban

greenspace, urban gardens and landscaped areas) provide ecosystem services at highly localised

scales. These include, for example:


provision of shade (and associated human health and leisure values);

provision of aesthetic values (in an often heavily built-up environment);

support for biodiversity through the provision of urban habitat and fauna corridors; and

provision of opportunities for recreation and leisure.

Threats arise through pollution (e.g. solid waste disposal), physical damage by people and vehicles,

poor management and inadequate maintenance.

5.8 Coral reefs

Coral reefs border most of the islands and/or form barrier reefs around and between the larger

islands, especially throughout Choiseul and Isabel Provinces (Figure 5-1). These reefs and the

marine lagoons they form are a vital natural resource, sustaining the livelihoods and sustenance of

nearby coastal communities, and are also directly essential for maintaining the nation’s inshore

fisheries. Specifically, inshore fisheries and marine resources play a critical and unique role in the

rural economy and livelihoods of Solomon Islands communities, supplying daily protein and

micronutrients, and serving as one of the few sources of cash income (Abernathy et al. 2014).

Examples of the types of resources harvested include fish (e.g. coral trout, silverfish, snapper,

sweetlips, surgeon fish, trevally, parrotfish, kingfish, sharks, eels), crayfish, turtles, octopus, clams,

beche-de-mer, trochus and coral (Feinberg 2010; Moseby et al. 2012).

Other ecosystem services are also recognised and together the key services for coral reefs at a

national scale are summarised below.

Provision of food – Inshore marine resources are the most common source of animal-based food

in diets (Aswani 2002; Bell et al. 2009 in Abernathy et al. 2014), essential for subsistence and

food security.

Support biodiversity and marine fauna of the Solomon Islands’ EEZ – marine species’ richness is

mainly concentrated in waters from Guadalcanal north-westward to Isabel, Western and Choiseul

Provinces (

Figure 5-2). These are largely coastal waters, of which coral reefs are a prominent feature. Coral

reefs are a very important habitat for marine fauna, often being required as essential feeding,

breeding, spawning, cleaning and aggregation habitats (e.g. for sea turtles, grouper, coral and

migratory species).

Support income and revenue generation, as well as community livelihoods – This is primarily

through commercial extractive enterprises (e.g. fishing, aquarium trade, coral, lime extraction),

and also tourism operations such as scuba diving.

Provision of raw materials – This includes coral rock (i.e. building and construction material) and

lime production (associated with both the construction industry for concrete production, and also

for betel nut use).

Hazard protection, particularly coastal protection from natural hazards – Reefs act as a wave

against wave energy (important during major events such as tsunami, cyclones and storm

surges).


Regulation of marine primary productivity, nutrient and carbon cycling – Reefs are critical to

coastal food chains, which are in turn essential for maintaining the food, biodiversity and income-

related services above.

Support of traditional cultural values and practices – this includes kastom medicine, shell money,

ornaments and decorations.

Provision of opportunities for recreation and leisure, as well as scientific research pursuits.

With respect to commercial harvesting of sharks (i.e. reef sharks for both the meat and fin trades) it

is worth mentioning that shark fins are highly valued as both a reliable and extremely cost-effective

export. Fins are dried, do not require refrigeration and, if treated with care, can be stored for months

without losing their value (Feinberg 2010). Demand is high and Solomon Islanders eat shark meat

so the carcasses do not go to waste (Feinberg 2010).


Figure 5-1 Mangroves, seagrass and reefs


Figure 5-2 Solomon Islands marine species richness (courtesy MACBIO)

69


Coral reefs and the services they provide are subject to existing threats from both land and sea-

based sources, most of which are associated with anthropogenic activities. Key threats are described

below.

Logging and deforestation result in increased sediment loads to coastal waters and sedimentation

of reefs and seagrass meadows. Halpern et al. (2013) observed many lagoon reefs in the

Solomon Islands smothered with sediment up to 10 cm deep through sedimentation from upland

logging. It is thought that lagoons and reefs have some resilience to sedimentation where they

are located in close proximity to major rivers, because they naturally experience sediment run-off

(Halpern et al. 2013).

Overharvesting – overfishing and unsustainable harvesting/extraction of marine resources occur

to varying degrees throughout Solomon Islands. This threat is likely to be exacerbated by

increasing population growth and the associated increase in demand for reef resources. With

respect to fisheries, there are limits to the capacity of the domestic fisheries sector to support the

nutritional requirements of people in Solomon Islands (Bell et al. 2009; Weeratunge et al. 2011 in

Abernathy et al. 2014). In this regard, the SI National Strategy for the Management of Inshore

Fisheries and Marine Resources (2010) identifies community-based marine resource

management as critical for sustainable and secure inshore fisheries. This strategy is essential to

the Solomon Island government’s strategy for sustaining inshore marine resources and ensuring

food security in the face of population growth, climate change and resource degradation

(Abernathy et al. 2014) and additionally, the government is considered an existing EbA strategy.

Habitat destruction and deterioration through destructive harvesting practices such as dynamite

fishing, and other activities damaging reef habitat (e.g. anchorage, coral harvesting, tourism

pollution – see below).

Coastal pollution – which primarily originates from untreated discharges, solid waste disposal and

chemical inputs (e.g. sewage and industrial, shipping and hospital waste disposal), and run-off

(e.g. sediment, nutrients, pesticides). In addition to direct pollution threats (e.g. digestion of

plastic, food contamination, water quality decline, bioaccumulation), secondary threats may also

occur and may include increasing populations of crown-of-thorns starfish (which feed on corals).

Coastal development through developments, such as reclamation and settlement expansion, and

construction of coastal infrastructure, such as jetties and seawalls.

Other threats such as coral bleaching, ghost fishing (i.e. fishing by discarded nets and traps), and

the potential threat of invasive species (i.e. marine pests) via shipping activities or other means.

5.9 Seagrass / marine flora

Seagrass meadows in the Solomon Islands occur in shallow nearshore areas, primarily in marine lagoons, in the vicinity of river mouths and other semi-enclosed coastal waters (Figure 5-1).

This ecosystem category also includes other marine flora (marine macroalgae), primarily to capture the commercial farming of seaweed. Seaweed farming tends to occur in marine lagoons and therefore tends to occupy a similar niche to seagrass (see map of production sites in

Figure 5-3), and therefore are also subject to some of the same threats as seagrass.


From a community perspective, the following key ecosystem services are recognised:

provision of food for subsistence and commercial purposes directly (i.e. net fishing in marine

lagoons), and indirectly as a primary producer contributing to the productivity and food chains of

nearshore marine environments;

source of income generation (i.e. in the case of commercial farming of seaweed);

support for marine fauna habitats and biodiversity, including essential habitats for marine

megafauna of cultural and conservation significance (e.g. turtles, dugong);

provision of kastom medicine (e.g. there are traditional medicinal uses for holophila spp.); and

regulation of coastal sedimentary habitats and sediment transport (i.e. stabilises coastal

environments by trapping and retaining sediment).

Figure 5-3 Seaweed production sites (from Kronen 2010)

Existing threats to this ecosystem category are derived from both land and sea-based sources, with

key threats to seagrass meadows including:

sedimentation, which smothers seagrass and is exacerbated by run-off from deforested areas;


physical habitat loss and disturbance from destructive harvesting practices (e.g. trawling) in

seagrass areas, anchoring, reclamation and coastal development;

pollution from sources such as sewage inputs, run-off and inappropriate disposal of solid wastes,

which can affect seagrasses (e.g. nutrient, sediment and herbicide loads) and their inhabitant

fauna (e.g. plastic digestion, contamination, bioaccumulation of potential contaminants); and

overharvesting of target fauna species associated with seagrass meadows.

Seaweed farms are affected by threats such as cyclones and other climatic events that can devastate

farms, herbivory of seaweed by fish and other animals, extreme low tides and market effects.

5.10 Coastline / beaches

Beaches and other foreshores throughout Solomon Islands’ extensive coastline(s) – or side sea –

provide the boundary between terrestrial and marine environments. As most communities are

situated in or near coastal areas, environments along the coastline are often heavily utilised by

communities for a variety of uses. Key ecosystem services in this regard include:

supporting waste disposal for sanitation purposes (i.e. toileting).;

provision of water for domestic uses (e.g bathing);

provision of raw materials for building and construction (e.g. sand, gravel, stones).

support for transport activities (e.g. act as a boat landing area, provide accessible land for storage

for canoes and other vessels);

support for cultural values and practices through the provision of materials for jewellery,

ornaments and decorations (e.g. shells, stones).

support of biodiversity and fauna, with special recognition as an essential breeding habitat for sea

turtles (both of which are of high cultural and conservation value);

regulation of coastal protection from natural hazards (i.e. buffer coastal communities against

inundation from tsunami and storm surge etc.); and

provision of opportunities for recreation and leisure activities.

Existing threats tend to be concentrated at locations where this ecosystem occurs in close proximity

to human settlements and/or other human activities. At these locations, the main existing threats

include:

habitat loss and modification through activities such as coastal development and reclamation,

seawall construction and other physical disturbances (including extraction of sand, gravel and

other materials);

habitat loss and modification via natural events and processes, such as cyclones, tsunami, natural

sediment transport processes (i.e. coastal erosion and accretion);

pollution caused by sanitation and disposal of household solid wastes. These have multiple

effects on the environment, such as habitat modification, habitat and fauna contamination and


loss of aesthetic values. They also pose a significant human health risk to communities that utilise

the same area for bathing, recreation and/or fishing.

unsustainable or excessive extraction of raw materials, especially sand and gravel, which can

alter both the ecosystem characteristics and functions; and

increasing human population sizes, which adds pressure to the above ecosystem services.

5.11 Mangroves

Solomon Islands possesses nearly 65,000 ha of mangrove forests containing approximately 25

mangrove species (Warren-Rhodes et al. 2011). The indicative location of mangrove areas is shown

in Figure 5-1, noting that this intertidal vegetation type is patchily distributed and not prominent

around the coastline of all islands. Again, being a coastal ecosystem, mangroves are often located

in close proximity to coastal settlements. In such cases, they are usually highly valued and heavily

utilised by local communities.

The primary mangrove ecosystem services for communities and the natural resources they rely upon

are:

provision of food, primarily to meet subsistence and food security needs through sources such as

fish, mud crabs, molluscs, mangrove fruit (e.g. mangrove clams in the genus Polymesoda and

ark clams Andara spp.);

provision of raw materials (mainly mangrove timber) for construction and building, as well as for

firewood;

support of biodiversity and fauna habitat, noted for value as breeding, nursery and feeding

grounds for fisheries species;

contribution to coastal protection from natural hazards by acting as a physical barrier between the

land and sea, and stabilising foreshores to protect against coastal erosion;

support of traditional cultural values and practices through the provision of materials used for

kastom medicine, crafts, tools (gardening), weapons, shell money and dye, etc.

support of waste disposal and dispersal services, particularly with respect to sanitation uses (i.e.

common toilet area);

regulating of the carbon cycle and climate, particularly through carbon sequestration; and

support for community-level income-generation and livelihoods where the above services are

commercialised or traded (e.g. food, timber).

In the context of the above ecosystem services, the most relevant existing threats to mangroves are

unsustainable harvesting of mangrove timber, as well as clearing/loss of mangroves for reclamation

and coastal constructions. Overall, key existing threats include:

unsustainable harvesting of timber and food resources, which is being exacerbated in coastal

communities that have high population growth rates (and rely on mangroves);


mangrove clearing/loss for land reclamation, construction and coastal development, as well as

clearing for transport/passage;

sediment transport processes (erosion and accretion), particularly large scale and sudden

sediment movements such as sedimentation resulting from flooding; such processes can

undermine (erosion) or smother (sedimentation) mangrove root systems;

pollution from household sanitation uses and solid waste disposal, which can contaminate local

food resources, cause water quality degradation, reduce aesthetic values and introduce

persistent materials such plastics into the environment; and

the fact that mangrove environments are often poorly perceived by people (i.e. often considered

a waste disposal area) and do not usually have the conservation prestige afforded to coral reefs,

for example). This can further contribute to the above anthropogenic effects.

5.12 Sea / Ocean

Beyond the nearshore marine ecosystems already mentioned (i.e. reefs, seagrasses, mangroves,

beaches), the marine area of Solomon Islands remains vast, encompassing much of the nation ’s

approximately 1.6 million km2 exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This sea contains pelagic waters to

the deep sea, and a complex topography of seafloor features such as seamounts, ridges and

canyons. While oceans provide extensive ecosystem services on a global scale, for the people of

Solomon Islands, the most directly relevant services at a local to national scale include:

provision of food in the form of pelagic fish (e.g. dolphinfish, bonito, tuna, sharks, barracuda,

wahoo, sailfish and marlin); together with fish from other marine environments (e.g. reefs and

lagoons), this food contributes to providing the primary animal protein in local diets;

a means of income and revenue-generation through supporting the fisheries industries, from

artisanal to major international fishing operations (detailed further below);

provision of a means of transport, noting that marine-based transport is an important means of

inter-island travel, freight and logistics, as well as the primary means of importing and exporting

international goods;

provision of mineral resources – while deep-sea mining is not being undertaken, the ocean is

recognised as containing a wealth of mineral resources in Solomon Islands’ EEZ; these minerals

are particularly concentrated around deep-sea hydrothermal vents and sea mounts, and have

been the subject of considerable exploration activities in recent years; and

regulation of atmosphere and climate.

Seas are highly connected globally, such that Solomon Island marine ecosystems are prone to

effects from outside the nation’s EEZ. Indeed, global phenomena such as global warming are among

the greatest threats. Existing threats originating locally remain relevant and are also important to

concentrate on, particularly since they are within the nation’s jurisdiction and can be managed

autonomously by the Solomon Island’s government. In this regard, and in the context of the above

ecosystem services, the key existing threats are pollution and unsustainable extractive industries.


Pollution is both land-derived (i.e. run-off, sewage inputs, solid waste disposal) and marine-derived

from shipping and vessel operations (e.g. vessel fuel and oil spills, antifoulant, ballast, rubbish

disposal). Solid wastes (i.e. rubbish) do not necessary originate locally, but may be mobilised from

external waters by currents (e.g. floating plastics, ghost nets, floating rafts of accumulated marine

debris). Unsustainable harvesting is also a significant threat to most of the fisheries resources,

especially some tuna species that are a major revenue stream to the nation through fishing licences

to international fishing fleets.

By way of further fisheries background, marine waters in Solomon Islands are separated into distinct fishing access areas as summarised in Table 5-4 and illustrated in Figure 5-4.

Note that waters from the mean high water mark (MHWM) to the archipelagic waters, inclusive, are the most productive of the EEZ (Figure 5-5).

In part due to these fishing access boundaries, as well as other factors (such as proximity and access

to land and markets, varying population sizes across the nation, and the distribution of marine

habitats and productivity), the intensity of fishing is not uniform across the nation.

Higher intensity artisanal fishing tends to occur around northern Guadalcanal, Western Province and

Malaita (Figure 5.6).

Tuna catches (combining catches from purse seine, pole-and-line, and longline tuna fishing methods

from 2001 to 2010) are strongly concentrated in the north-western quarter of the EEZ (Figure 5-7).


Table 5-4 Fishing access arrangements (as per Solomon Islands Tuna Management and Development Plan)

Area Permitted methods and licence types

MHWM–3 NM Artisanal fishers and small scale fishing operations supplying local markets

3 NM–12 NM Permitted methods and licence types as above, plus:

- small scale industrial fishing, pole-and-line, troll and handline

Archipelagic waters (12 NM to UNCLOS recognised archipelago)

Permitted methods and licence types as above, plus:

- locally registered fishing vessels landing their catch for onshore processing and using either purse seine, pole-and-line, troll or handline methods

12-30 NM Permitted methods and licence types as above, plus:

- foreign vessels chartered by local companies landing their catch for onshore processing and using the fishing methods listed above

30–60 NM Permitted methods and licence types as above, plus:

- foreign longline, including chartered by locally based vessel, not landing catch to onshore processing

- foreign purse seine vessels operating under the FSM arrangement and foreign vessels operating under bilateral agreements using the fishing methods above

60–200 NM Permitted methods and licence types as above, plus:

- purse seine vessels operating under the US Treaty


Figure 5-4 Fishing access area boundaries


Figure 5-5 Ocean productivity (courtesy MACBIO)

78


Figure 5-6 Artisanal fishing intensity (courtesy MACBIO)


Figure 5-7 Tuna catch in Solomon Islands, 2001–2010 (courtesy MACBIO)


5.13 Groundwater

Fresh to brackish ground water is thought to occur throughout most of the Solomon Islands. At a

national scale, ground water is an essential ecosystem providing a water source for communities,

including water for drinking and/or domestic uses. This is particularly important for communities on

smaller islands, atolls and cays with little in the way of alternative freshwater sources. In such cases,

groundwater is a critical survival resource for communities. These locations include, for example,

many communities in Rennell and Bellona, and Temote Provinces, as well as Ontong Java atoll.

Groundwater is also used as a commercial resource for income generation through the bottled water

industry.

Given the primary ecosystem service to communities is the provision of water for human consumption

and domestic uses, the main threat of concern in this respect is contamination and declining water

quality. This can occur as a result of natural disturbances (e.g. drought, tsunami or earthquakes

causing saltwater infiltration) or human-derived pollution sources such as sewage, domestic wastes

(e.g. grey water, domestic animals such as keeping pig pens near wells), and industrial discharges

(e.g. mining). Growing human populations also increase the reliance on (and/or extraction of)

groundwater.

5.14 Cultivated land (gardens and plantations)

Land is cultivated throughout Solomon Islands, primarily as a means of subsistence, but also

commercially for income-generation through both the local and export markets. Land may be

cultivated in the form of community gardens or larger plantations. Communities rely heavily on root

crops as staples for subsistence (e.g. cassava, sweet potato, taro, yam). Other important cultivated

crops and food sources include banana, pineapple, breadfruit, papaya, tobacco, sago, coconuts, oil

palm, pumpkin, watermelon, sugar cane, fruit trees (e.g. Burckella spp., Malay apple), Tahitian

chestnut, canarium almond, turmeric, and areca nut (Feinburg 2010).

In addition to food and income, commercial use of cultivated land provides wealth, employment and

livelihoods. Coconuts, palm oil and, to a lesser extent, sweet potato, yams and taro have the highest

production value. For example, coconuts had an estimated production value of approximately

25,000,000 in 2009 (Table 5-5). Coconuts, oil palm and cocoa were the crops with the greatest

export value.


Table 5-5 Production value of key crops, 2009 (adapted from Rodil and Mias-Crea 2014)

Crop Banana Cassava

Cocoa Coconut

Oil Palm

Rice Sweet Potato

Taro Yam

Production (tons)

330 2,500 4,259 276,000 39,000 2,800 86,000 44,000 32,000

Production value (million)

3.3 25.0 11.8 0.6 8.6 4.5 6.5

Quantity exported (tons)

3,575 21,352 19,745

Export value (million)

5.6 6.5 14.0

Key existing threats to the ongoing functioning and value of cultivated land for food and income

production include:

invasive species, pests and diseases affecting crops;

reduced soil fertility and land productivity from factors such as over farming and monoculture

cropping;

accumulation and/or inappropriate use of chemicals (i.e. pesticides, fertilisers);

climatic effects and natural hazards, especially drought and extremely hot days, as well as

physical damage from cyclone and storm events; and

competing land uses and indirect impacts from other industries (e.g. logging, mining, industrial

activities).

5.15 Summary of human induced threats to ecosystem services

Table 5-6 provides a summary of the key threats to ecosystems at the national scale. The concept

of social-ecological resilience recognises the interdependence between people and nature and is

clearly reflected by the ecosystem services identified above, on which Solomon Island communities

and economies rely heavily for their livelihoods and well-being.

Despite the critical contribution ecosystem services provide to the human resilience, the ecosystems

of Solomon Islands are subject to significant anthropogenic threats such as land-use change, habitat

loss and pollution through logging, urbanisation, expansion of agricultural land, infrastructure

development, mining, overfishing and exploitation. Furthermore, these threats are exacerbated by

the nation’s rapid rate of population growth and the current and future effects of climate change (to

be explored further in Section 7).


By identifying key ecosystem services that are under threat by these pressures, targeted

management options can be designed to build and strengthen the resilience of ecosystems services

and, in turn, the resilience of Solomon Islands to future climate change effects.


Table 5-6 Summary of key threats to each ecosystem service

Key Ecosystems

Key Ecosystem Services identified by community

Climate Related Threats Non-Climate Related Threats

Tid

es, sto

rm s

urg

e,

salin

e

intr

usio

n

Dro

ug

ht

/ d

ecre

ased

rain

fall

Flo

od

ing

/ in

cre

ased

rain

fall

Co

asta

l ero

sio

n / c

urr

en

t

ch

an

ges

Riv

er,

gu

lly, str

eam

ba

nk

ero

sio

n

Ho

t d

ays

La

nd

slid

e

Ocean

acid

ific

ati

on

Cyclo

ne

s (

inte

ns

. fr

eq

.)

Inv

asiv

es

Dis

ease

Ch

an

gin

g s

pe

cie

s

dis

trib

uti

on

Po

llu

tio

n (

wate

r-b

ased

)

So

lid

waste

Mn

gt.

Develo

pm

en

t (e

.g.

reso

urc

e

de

vel.

)

La

nd

cle

ari

ng

/ h

ab

itat

los

s

and m

od

ific

ati

on

Po

p. In

cre

ase, lo

ss o

f

kn

ow

led

ge

tra

ns

fer

Ch

an

ge in

lan

d u

se /

urb

an

isati

on

Ina

deq

ua

te r

eso

urc

e

man

ag

em

en

t

Eco

no

mic

pre

ssu

res

Po

licy c

ha

ng

es

Neg

ati

ve h

um

an

be

havio

ur/

att

itu

de

Rivers, streams

Food provision

Water supply (drinking and domestic)

Water supply (irrigation)

Recreation

Transportation, anchorage

Raw materials provision

Energy generation (hydropower)

Cultural values

Waste disposal and dispersal

Support fisheries



Raw materials and fuel provision

Fauna habitat

Kastom medicine provision

Source of income/revenue


Nutrient cycling and primary productivity

Soil retention and fertility

Air regulation and shade provision


Support recreation and tourism

Cultural values and handicrafts

Food provision

Other Terrestrial Lands

Commercial value

Provides identity and heritage

Support forests

Minerals source (mining industry)

Land provision

Coral Reefs Habitat provision / biodiversity

Food provision

Coastal protection

Income and revenue source

Fishing grounds

Lime extraction

Raw materials provision (coral rock)

Cultural values (shells, ornaments)


Kastom medicine

Supports tourism industry

Supports marine food chain

Coastline / Beach

Support recreation/leisure

Waste disposal and dispersal

Domestic use (bathing)

Cultural values and handicrafts



Supports transport (boat landing)

Fauna habitat (e.g. turtle nesting)

Coastal protection

Mangroves

Food provision


Fauna habitat

Coastal protection, shoreline stabilisation

Kastom medicine

Recreation Waste disposal and dispersal

Cultural values (crafts, dye)


Sea / Ocean

Support transport

Habitat provision

Food provision

Climate and atmospheric regulation

Income and revenue generation

Mountains, Highlands


Habitat provision and biodiversity

Water source

Climatic regulation

Provide protection from disasters

Support navigation


Food provision

Water provision (drinking, domestic)

Habitat provision

Support aquaculture


Cultural values (heritage)

Water quality and flood flow regulation

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaweeds)

Habitat provision

Primary productivity

Income generation ( seaweed)

Kastom medicine and food

Seabed stabilisation

Groundwater

Water provision

Income generation (spring water)


Income generation

Food provision


6 National ecosystem valuations

6.1 Economic values for ecosystem services

The values used for national scale ecosystem services have been adapted from MACBIO (2015)

and de Groot et al (2012). The values from MACBIO (2015) are based on local analysis and were

used in the first instance, while the values from de Groot et al. 2015 were used where MACBIO

values are not applicable.

MACBIO (2015) values are shown in Table 6-1. It should be noted that these values are shown as

national totals, and while they provide insights into the total value of services they may be less

applicable in economic assessment. Additionally, some values may not completely capture benefits

or costs.

Table 6-1 Summary of national ecosystem service values (adapted from MACBIO 2015)

Ecosystem USD 2015, hectare/p.a. SBD 2015, hectare/p.a.

Subsistence fisheries 61,000,000 476,900,000

Inshore commercial 9,700,000 75,800,000

Beche-der-mer 500,000 3,600,000

Aquarium trade 200,000 1,300,000

Trochus 300,000 2,300,000

Offshore tuna 228,900,000 1,789,900,000

Deep sea minerals 100,000 1,100,000

Tourism 16,400,000 128,000,000

Coastal protection 5,000,000 39,400,000

Carbon sequestration 22,300,000 174,600,000

Research, education and management 1,300,000 9,900,000

The de Groot et al. (2012) values presented in Table 6-2 have been aggregated at the ecosystem

level. Disaggregated values for specific services within specific ecosystems can also be utilised for

the development of future adaptation options.

888


Table 6-2 Summary of national ecosystem service values (adapted from de Groot et al. 2012)

Ecosystem USD 2015, hectare/p.a. SBD 2015, hectare/p.a.

Coral reefs 256,469 2,005,230

Coastal systems (estuaries, continental shelf area and seagrass)

29,670 231,975

Coastal wetlands (tidal marsh, mangroves and saltwater wetlands)

8,913 69,683

Fresh water lakes, rivers 7,071 55,289

Inland wetlands 8,441 65,993

Tropical forests 3,202 25,037

Grasslands 1,473 11,516

Solomon Islanders rely heavily on ecosystem services for their livelihood, income generation, health

and well-being. The economic value of these services is clearly substantial and likely to exceed

revenue generated from services involved in extractive industries (e.g. forest ecosystems).

Where data were available on ecosystem coverage at a national scale, the estimated overall annual

economic value is presented below.

Mangroves are reported to cover an estimated 65,000 ha in Solomon Islands (Sulu et al. 2012).

Utilising the per hectare estimate for coastal wetlands in Table 6-2, mangroves have an annual

economic value of USD 579,345,000 (2015) or SBD 4,529,395,000 (2015).

Seagrass is estimated to cover an area of 10,000 ha (ibid) and represents an economic value of

USD 296,700,000 (2015) and SBD 2,319,750,000 (2015) based on the annual ecosystem value

for coastal systems.

Based on the trend of forest clearing presented in Section 5, Figure 4-2, forests were estimated

to cover an area of 2,150,000 ha in 2015. Utilising the economic value presented in Table 6-2 for

tropical forest, Solomon Island forests represent an annual economic value of approximately USD

6,884,300,000 (2015) and SBD 53,829,550,000 (2015).

Ecosystem valuations provide the support and justification for public policies to protect ecosystems

and prioritise the allocation of programme spending to maximise the environmental benefits per dollar

spent (King and Mazzotta 2000). There is a strong economic case for investing in ecosystem

services, as many studies find that the costs of ecosystem restoration and protection are far

outweighed by the benefits (Carabine 2015). Additionally, if land and resource owners had an

increased understanding of the value of ecosystems and the ecosystem services they provide, more

informed decisions could be made for the long term.

89


7 Climate change vulnerability assessment

As discussed in Section 2.4, the vulnerability of an ecosystem to climate change is the degree to

which a system is susceptible to the adverse effects of climate change. This is a function of its

exposure to climatic variations, its sensitivity to climate variation, and its adaptive capacity, or ability

to adjust or cope, with climate change.

The following section presents a snapshot of Solomon Islands’ current climate, climate projections

for 2030 and 2090, the potential effects of climate change threats on the broad marine, aquatic and

terrestrial ecosystems, and, lastly, it identifies the ecosystem services that are predicted to have high

or very high vulnerability to various climate change variables for 2030 and 2090.

7.1 Current climate

Climate is usually defined as the average weather over 30 years or more. Climate change refers to

a change in the state of the climate that can be identified by changes in the mean and/or the variability

of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer (IPCC 2007).

The climate of Solomon Islands varies considerably from year to year due to the El Niño-Southern

Oscillation (ENSO). ENSO includes two extreme phases and a neutral phase. The El Niño phase

brings warmer, drier wet season conditions and La Niña brings cooler, wetter, wet seasons. The

ENSO effect is stronger in Santa Cruz than in Honiara.

The following section presents a snapshot of the current climate for Solomon Islands based on the

assessments by PACCSAP (CSIRO 2011; 2014).

7.1.1.1 Air temperature

Temperatures in Solomon Islands are relatively constant throughout the year with only very small

changes from season to season and are strongly tied to changes in ocean temperature. Annual

maximum and minimum temperatures have increased in Honiara since 1951, with maximum

temperatures increasing at a rate of 0.15°C per decade. Consistent with global warming, there have

been significant increases in warm nights and decreases in cool nights for both Honiara and Munda.

Cool days have also decreased at Munda.

7.1.1.2 Rainfall

Rainfall in Solomon Islands is affected by the South Pacific Convergence Zone and the Intertropical

Convergence Zone, which bring bands of heavy rainfall and thunderstorm activity. The West Pacific

Monsoon also influences rainfall in Solomon Islands. It is driven by large differences in temperature

between the land and the ocean.

Solomon Islands has two distinct seasons, with a wet season from November to April and a dry

season from May to October. In the dry season at Honiara, on average about 100 mm of rain falls

per month compared to upwards of 300 mm in the wet season. Further east, Santa Cruz receives

more constant rainfall during the year, averaging between 280 mm and 420 mm per month.

There is notable interannual variability in rainfall associated with ENSO but there has been little

change in rainfall trends at Honiara since 1950 and at Munda since 1962. However, since 1955 there

90


has been a decreasing trend in the number of rainy days at Honiara. Since 1962, there has been an

increasing trend in annual maximum one-day rainfall at Munda.

7.1.1.3 Wind-driven waves

The wind-wave climate for Solomon Islands shows strong interannual variability associated with

ENSO and there is strong spatial variation across the region. Small waves (mean height around 0.15

m) occur at Honiara, which is sheltered from easterly trade winds, and display strong seasonal

variability of direction characterised by trade winds, monsoons and cyclones. Larger waves occur on

the outlying easterly islands (e.g. to the north of Santa Cruz), and are characterised by variability of

the Southern Hemisphere trade winds and westerly monsoon winds. Waves larger than 2.5 m occur

mostly during December–March from the north-west through to north-east associated with tropical

cyclones and extra-tropical storms. The height of a 1-in-50 year wave event on the north coast of

Santa Cruz is 8.0 m.

7.1.1.4 Tropical cyclones

Based on the 1969 to 2011 seasons, tropical cyclones occur mainly between November and April

with an average of 29 cyclones per decade. Cyclones were most frequent in El Niño years (39

cyclones per decade) and least frequent in La Niña years and neutral years (21 cyclones per

decade). Twenty-seven per cent of the cyclones between 1981 and 2011 were severe events

(Category 3 or stronger) and most intense events occur during an El Niño.

7.1.1.5 Sea level

Sea level has risen near Solomon Islands by about 8 mm per year since 1993, which is more than

the global average of 2.8–3.6 mm per year. The higher rate of rise may be related to natural

fluctuations caused by ENSO.

7.1.1.6 Ocean acidification

Aragonite, a metastable form of calcium carbonate, is used by hard reef-building corals to build

skeletons. As the oceans acidify in response to increasing carbon uptake, the carbonate ion

concentration of seawater decreases, making it harder for corals to grow. For coral growth, saturation

states above 4 are optimal, Between 3.5 and 4 are adequate, and between 3 and 3.5, marginal, with

no corals historically found below 3 (Guinotte et al. 2003). Aragonite saturation state has declined

In Solomon Islands from about 4.5 in the late 18th century to an observed value of about 3.9 ± 0.1

by 2000.

7.2 Future climate projections

The following section summarises the climate projections for Solomon Islands (Australian Bureau of

Meteorology and CSIRO [2014]) based on the very high IPCC emissions scenario Representative

Concentration Pathways (RCP) 8.5, the highest scenario of the 5th Assessment Report, for the short

term (2030) and longer term (2090). All projected changes represent the overall change relative to

1995 levels of each climate variable.

91


7.2.1.1 Average temperature

There is very high confidence there will be further warming over Solomon Islands. Relative to 1995,

warming increases up to 1.0°C by 2030 and up to 2.0–4.0°C by 2090 are projected for RCP 8.5.

Temperature rises may be 0.2°C greater over land than over the ocean. While relatively warm and

cool years and decades will still occur due to natural variability, there is projected to be more warm

years and decades on average in a warmer climate.

7.2.1.2 Extreme temperature

There is very high confidence that the temperature of extremely hot days and extremely cool days

will increase, but there is low confidence in the magnitude of projected change. The temperature on

extremely hot days is projected to increase by about the same amount as the average temperature,

and the frequency of extremely hot days is expected to increase. The temperature of the 1-in-20-

year hot day is projected to increase by approximately 0.6°C to 0.8°C by 2030 and 0.8°C to 2.9°C by

2090.

7.2.1.3 Average rainfall

The effect of climate change on average rainfall may not be obvious in the short or medium term due

to natural variability, and there is low confidence that annual rainfall will increase slightly. The CMIP5

model average is for a slight increase in projected annual rainfall change, with the range greater in

the highest emissions scenarios. Dynamical downscaling suggests that there may be some

difference in the rainfall change over land compared to over the ocean, and on the western side of

islands compared to the east.

7.2.1.4 Extreme rainfall

There is high confidence that the frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall events will increase but

there is there is low confidence in the magnitude of projected change. The current 1-in-20-year daily

rainfall amount is projected to increase by approximately 9 mm by 2030. By 2090, it is projected to

increase by 43 mm under RCP 8.5. The current 1-in-20-year daily rainfall event may become, on

average, a 1-in-4-year event for RCP 8.5 by 2090.

7.2.1.5 Drought

There is low confidence in the projections of drought duration and frequency because of the low

confidence in the magnitude of rainfall projections and uncertainty around projected changes in

ENSO. However, the overall proportion of time spent in drought is expected to decrease under all

scenarios. Under RCP 8.5 the frequency of mild, moderate and severe drought events is expected

to decrease, while the frequency of extreme drought events is expected to remain stable.

7.2.1.6 Cyclones

There is a medium level of confidence that globally, the frequency of tropical cyclones is likely to

decrease by the end of the 21st century. However, there is likely to be an increase in the mean

maximum wind speed between 2% and 11% and an increase in rainfall intensity of about 20% within

100 km of the cyclone centre. For Solomon Islands, there is a medium level of confidence that there

will be a decrease in cyclone genesis frequency for the south-west basin in the order of 5 to 30%.

92


However, by the late 21st century there is an expected increase in the proportion of more intense

storms.

7.2.1.7 Wind-driven waves

Overall, there is low confidence in projected changes in Solomon Islands’ windwave climate. There

is low confidence that during December–March, projected changes will include a significant decrease

in mean wave height, accompanied by a decrease in wave period, with no significant change in

direction (which is variable in the wet season). There is also low confidence there will be a decrease

in the strength of prevailing winds, with no change in the height of larger storm waves predicted. In

June–September, there are no statistically significant projected changes in wave properties. Possible

changes may include an increase in wave height and a decrease in period.

7.2.1.8 Sea level

There is very high confidence that mean sea level in Solomon Islands will continue to rise over the

21st century. There is moderate confidence that there will be a rise of between approximately 5–15

cm by 2030, with increases of 20–60 cm indicated by 2090 under the higher emissions scenarios. A

rise larger than that projected cannot be excluded and, since the early 1990s, sea level has been

rising globally near the upper end of the projections. Similar levels of interannual variability of sea

level, leading to periods of lower and higher regional sea levels, will occur in the order of 31 cm.

Winds and waves associated with weather phenomena will continue to lead to extreme sea-level

events.

7.2.1.9 Ocean acidification

The aragonite saturation state in Solomon Islands has declined from about 4.5 in the late 18th century

to about 3.9 by 2000. There is very high confidence that levels will continue to decrease with

increases in atmospheric CO2. Under RCP 8.5, the median aragonite will transition to marginal

conditions (3.5) around 2030. There is moderate confidence that the annual maximum aragonite

saturation state will reach values below 3.5 by about 2045 and continue to decline thereafter. Under

RCP 8.5 the aragonite saturation state continues to strongly decline thereafter to values where coral

reefs have not historically been found (<3.0).

7.2.1.10 Coral bleaching risk

The risk of coral bleaching increases with elevated water temperatures and depends on the duration

and magnitude of the temperature rise. There is very high confidence that, as the ocean warms, the

risk of coral bleaching increases. However, there is medium confidence in the projected rate of

change for Solomon Islands based on the medium confidence in the rate of change of sea-surface

temperature, and the complexity of changes at the reef-scale, including other potential stressors.

Based on current projections for sea-surface temperature, there is an overall decrease in the time

between two periods of elevated risk for bleaching and an increase in the duration of the elevated

risk. Under a long-term mean increase of 1°C, the average period of severe bleaching risk will last

8.2 weeks (with a minimum of 1.8 weeks and maximum of 4.5 months), and the average time

between risk events will be 2.6 years (minimum recurrence of 4.3 months and maximum recurrence

93


of 7.4 years). If severe bleaching events occur more often than once every five years, the long-term

viability of coral reef ecosystems becomes threatened.

7.3 Climate change threats

The following section discusses the potential effects of these climate change threats on the broad

marine, aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems of Solomon Islands and their ecosystem services.

Climate change threats have focused on the use of projections that have high to very high confidence

of occurring and represent the highest risks to Solomon Islands. Whilst drought may be an issue,

there is limited capacity to predict future scenarios for Solomon Islands based on current projections

and it has not been considered further. In addition, future scenarios for more intense cyclones and

altered wave patterns are not well established.

7.3.1 Temperature increase

Temperature is important in regulating chemical and physiological processes in terrestrial, aquatic,

estuarine and marine communities. However, predicting ecosystem responses to increasing

temperatures is complicated by the feedback and interactions among temperature change and the

interactions of other climate change stressors, such as rainfall and ocean acidification.

Increases in temperature could result in some changes to the composition and structure of terrestrial

vegetation communities of Solomon Islands, which may include the spread of insects, pathogens,

herbivores and pests. These ecological changes could affect native vegetation and community

responses to stressors such as fire, drought, storms and erosion, and also affect fauna habitat

values, including aquatic receiving environments. The potential increase in pests and disease could

affect agricultural lands, potentially resulting in reduced crop yields, and an increase in the number

of hot days will potentially have negative effects on human health.

Water temperature regulates oxygen, pH, conductivity, photosynthesis and respiration rates.

Increases in temperatures could directly alter aquatic ecological processes, affect the distribution of

aquatic species and could also affect the quality of water resources for human and agricultural use.

Increased water temperature could affect algal production and the availability of light, oxygen and

carbon for estuarine species. It could also affect important microbial processes such as nitrogen

fixation and denitrification in estuaries (Short and Neckles 1999; Lomas et al. 2002).

It is well established that the risk of coral bleaching increases with elevated sea temperatures. When

ocean temperatures exceed summertime maximums by 1.0–2.0°C for a prolonged period (1–3

weeks), corals become stressed, increasing the risk of coral bleaching (Berkelmans et al. 2004;

Hoegh-Guldberg 1999). The longer the temperature is elevated above this limit, the greater the coral

bleaching risk. Long-term ocean warming will reduce the time between risk events and if these occur

more often than once every five years, the long-term viability of coral reef ecosystems becomes

threatened (Donner 2009).

Sea and air temperatures will continue to rise, with projections of up to 1.0°C by 2030 and

up to 2.0–4.0°C by 2090

94


7.3.2 Sea-level rise

The sea level will continue to rise, with projected increases of 5–15 cm by 2030 and 20–60

cm by 2090.

Ongoing sea-level rise may exacerbate shoreline erosion, inundate low-lying coastal habitats and

infrastructure, cause saline intrusion of surface waters and coastal aquifers, lead to higher levels of

sea flooding and increase the landward reach of sea waves and storm surges. Provided coastal

ecosystems can accrete vertically and maintain their elevation relative to sea level, they may be able

to adapt and migrate with sea level rise. However, local ecosystem responses to sea-level rise will

depend on coastal dynamic processes, including the total sediment budget, and the effect of

saltwater intrusion will depend on local conditions, such as aquifer dimensions, geology, groundwater

and surface water factors, run-off and rainfall patterns.

The combined effects of beach erosion from sea-level rise and an increase in cyclone intensity as a

result of climate change may exacerbate erosion, sedimentation or saline inundation of coastal

ecosystems, and may alter coastal hydrological regimes. Other variables, such as altered

biogeochemistry, altered amounts and patterns of suspended sediments loading, oxidation of organic

sediments, and the physical effects of wave energy, may all play important roles in determining

regional and local effects of-sea level rise and more intense storms (IPCC 2007).

When not subjected to environmental or anthropogenic stresses, coral reefs have been shown to

keep pace with rapid postglacial sea-level rise, suggesting sea-level rise may be unlikely to threaten

reefs in the next few decades (Hallock 2005). However, degradation of reefs following bleaching or

from ocean acidification may result in increased wave energy across reef flats, with the potential for

exacerbating shoreline erosion with sea-level rise (Sheppard et al. 2005).

Erosion of sandy barrier islands as a result of increased sea level could also alter local wave

conditions, which may enhance erosion rates of the shoreline, tidal creeks and adjacent wetlands.

Whilst the effects of accelerated sea-level rise on rocky shores is poorly understood, their persistence

will be influenced by storms and other coastal processes.

7.3.3 Ocean acidification

Ocean acidification is projected to increase with an associated decline in aragonite

concentrations, potentially to 3.5 around 2030, below 3.5 by 2045, and could potentially

continue to decline to 2090, and after, to < 3.0.

Decreased sea-water pH and carbonate saturation has the potential for reducing the ability of

carbonate flora and fauna to calcify, and could potentially increase dissolution of nutrients and

carbonate minerals in sediments (IPCC 2007).

Increases in the amount of dissolved CO2 in ocean ecosystems may lead to higher rates of

photosynthesis in submerged aquatic vegetation, such as seagrass and seaweed. However, algae

growth in lagoons and estuaries may also respond positively to elevated dissolved inorganic nutrients

95


and an increase in epiphytic or suspended algae may decrease light availability to submerged

aquatic vegetation.

As the oceans acidify in response to increasing carbon uptake, the aragonite concentration of

seawater decreases. Guinotte et al. (2003) suggest that seawater aragonite saturation states above

4 are optimal for coral growth and for the development of healthy reef ecosystems, with values from

3.5 to 4 adequate for coral growth, and values between 3 and 3.5, marginal. Coral reef ecosystems

have not been recorded at aragonite saturation states below 3, and these conditions have been

classified as extremely marginal for supporting coral growth (Guinotte et al. 2003). Ocean

acidification may also affect the growth of crustaceans and molluscs, and fisheries production. The

effect of acidification on the health of reef and marine ecosystems is likely to be compounded by

other stressors, including coral bleaching, storm damage, water quality and fishing pressure, and will

be an important adaptive challenge.

7.3.4 More extreme rain events

More extreme rain events are projected to occur with the current 1-in-20-year daily rainfall

amount, increasing by 9 mm by 2030 and 43 mm by 2090, and becoming a 1-in-4-year

event by 2090.

More extreme rain events could lead to more frequent episodes of soil saturation, increased soil

instability and soil erosion, and landslide frequency. Receiving aquatic ecosystems are sensitive to

changes in the frequency, duration and timing of extreme rainfall events and long-term changes in

run-off may alter hydrologic characteristics of aquatic ecosystems and affect species’ composition

and productivity.

Extreme rainfall events also determine the patterns and quality of freshwater flow to coastal and

estuarine habitats. Run-off into estuaries influences water residence time, nutrient delivery, vertical

stratification and salinity. Altering these properties can have significant effects on phytoplankton

populations and increase the risk of eutrophication. Changes in freshwater flow and timing can also

affect migration and spawning of many estuarine and marine fishery species. Rainfall patterns and

sea-level rise, in combination with human land use, will be important determinants of water quality in

coastal and marine ecosystems of Solomon Islands.

7.3.5 Summary of climate change threats

Figure 2-3 provides a summary of the ecosystems and their services for Solomon Islands, a summary

of their critical biophysical, ecological and land management dependencies, and the major climate

change threats to these. The way these ecosystems and their services will respond to the effects of

climate change will depend on the extent of ecosystem degradation from other anthropogenic

pressures, the magnitude and frequency of climate change threats, and the adaptive capacity of the

services. The following section provides a vulnerability assessment to calculate exposure, sensitivity

and adaptive capacity of the key ecosystem services to the main climate changes identified for

Solomon Islands: temperature rise, sea-level rise, ocean acidification and more extreme rain events.

96


7.4 Vulnerability of ecosystem services to climate change variables

Based on the critical climate variables or threats assessed for this project, by 2030 sea-level rise and

temperature increases, including extremes, could potentially affect a broad range of national

ecosystem services. Whilst sea-level rise will continue to affect coastal ecosystem services to 2090

and beyond, the projected magnitude of temperature increase may become the dominant climate

change threat to the broadest range of national ecosystem services (refer to Appendix C for the

output scores of the national scale vulnerability assessment). All projected changes presented in

each text box are changes relative to 1995 levels for each climate variable (e.g. for sea-level rise, an

increase of 13 cm to that of 1995 levels is projected).

7.4.1 Sea-level rise

By 2030, sea-level rise poses potential climate

change threats across a range of national

ecosystem services. A large proportion of national

ecosystem services identified during stakeholder

engagement are found to be potentially highly

vulnerable to sea-level rise, including income

generation and food provision, demonstrating the social attachment and reliance on coastal

ecosystems. At an overall ecosystem level, those potentially most vulnerable to 2030 and 2090 (and

beyond) sea-level rise are freshwater-dependent wetlands, lakes, swamps, and groundwater, which

have low adaptive capacity to saline intrusion. Beach-dependent species such as marine turtles (and

the services which rely on these) have a high vulnerability to sea-level rise, given their limitations to

adapt to other ecosystems (nesting is restricted to sand dunes). These projections are dependent on

the specific ecosystems’ adaptive capacity to retreat landward, and factors such as topography and

development boundaries.

As expected, 2090 sea level rise by 40 to 89 cm

will potentially affect a broader range of coastal

ecosystems and their services. Despite their

potentially high adaptability, mangroves and their

associated services, such as kastom medicine,

raw material and fuel, are expected to be more

vulnerable to 2090 sea levels, depending on mangrove location and their ability to migrate.

Ecosystem services associated with coastal rivers, streams and terrestrial forests, including food,

biodiversity, fisheries and water supply for both drinking and irrigation purposes, may also be

vulnerable, due to their low adaptive capacity to saline intrusion, but effects will depend on their

location and local hydrologic and geographic features.

2030 Sea-level Rise Projection Summary

Sea-level rise of between approx. 7–18 cm

Mean change: 13 cm

Confidence level is medium

2090 Sea-level Rise Projection Summary

Sea-level rise of between approx. 40–89 cm

Mean change: 63 cm


97


7.4.2 Air and sea temperature

Surface air temperatures in the Pacific are closely

related to sea-surface temperatures. Projected

changes to air temperature can therefore be used

as a guide to changes in sea-surface temperatures

(Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO

2014).

Although the climate projections for an increase in

annual air temperature and an increase in extreme

air temperature are varied, the potential effects

from these climate threats, combined with the

adaptive capacity of ecosystem services, result in

the same level of vulnerability. Hence, for the

purpose of this report, both climate variables are

grouped and discussed as a single threat: increase

in air temperature.

Ecosystems most vulnerable to the projected 2030 increase in air and sea temperature include coral

reefs, ocean/sea, seagrass and marine algae (seaweed), due to their moderate adaptive capacity to

increasing temperature. Based on the magnitude of temperature change, all other ecosystem

services are expected to demonstrate high adaptive capacity to a 1.0°C temperature increase.

On a national scale, the projected 2090 increase

in air temperature by 2–4°C presents a potential

climate change risk to a broad range of services

across marine, coastal and terrestrial

ecosystems. Marine ecosystems are anticipated

to be highly vulnerable to the projected

temperature increase due to coral reef, lagoon

and macroalgae having high sensitivity and low

capacity to adapt to temperature changes.

Aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems will be

moderately vulnerable to the projected

temperature change, which may be expressed by

changes in local biodiversity and sensitivity to other threats such as pests and disease, but many of

these effects may be manageable, e.g. improved land management.

2030 Air and Sea Temperature Projection Summary

Temp increase up to 1.0ºC relative to 1995

Mean change: 0.7ºC

Confidence level is very high

2030 Extreme Air Temperature Projection Summary

Temperature on extremely hot days is projected to increase the same amount as average temp

Frequency of extremely hot days is also expected to increase.

Temp of the 1-in-20-year hot day is projected to increase by approx. 0.8°C


2090 Air and Sea Temperature Projection Summary

Temp increase up to 2–4°C

Mean change: 2.8’C


2090 Extreme Air Temperature Projection Summary

Temperature on extremely hot days is projected to increase the same amount as average temp

Temp of the 1-in-20-year hot day is projected to increase by approx. 2.9°C


98


7.4.3 Ocean acidification

Coral reefs and their dependent services are vulnerable

to ocean acidification. Aragonite, a metastable form of

calcium carbonate, is used by reef building corals to

build skeletons. As oceans acidify, the carbonate ion

concentration in seawater decreases, making it harder

for corals to grow. For corals, saturation states above

4 are optimal, 3.5–4 adequate, and between 3 and 3.5

marginal, with no corals historically found below 3 (Guinotte et al. 2003).

Based on the projections, aragonite concentrations by 2030 may be adequate for corals but by 2090,

and beyond, the median aragonite saturation state may continue to strongly decline to values where

coral reefs have not historically been found (< 3.0).

Due to the projected strong decline of the aragonite

saturation state by 2090, threats to other marine

ecosystems are expected. For example, mangrove

food provisioning services, such as crustaceans and

molluscs, may also be vulnerable to ocean

acidification. Communities relying on corals for

essential services such as income, food and raw

materials, would need to adapt to other sources.

7.4.4 Extreme rainfall events

Compared with the other climate change variables

described above, extreme rainfall events for 2030 and 2090

are predicted to be a lower climate change threat to national

ecosystem services. Despite this, the quality of drinking

water may be vulnerable due to the effect of extreme rainfall

on soil erosion and sedimentation.

Extreme rainfall also presents a potential threat to

terrestrial forests and their services through soil erosion

and landslip, which could have indirect effects on water

quality in receiving ecosystems, such as rivers and

coastal lagoons. Land management practices such as

reforestation of receiving catchments could help reduce

these threats.

2030 Ocean Acidification Projection Summary

Median aragonite saturation state will transition to marginal conditions (3.5) around 2030.

Mean change: -0.4 Ωar


2090 Ocean Acidification Projection Summary

Median aragonite saturation state will continue to strongly decline thereafter to values where coral reefs have not historically been found (< 3.0).

Mean change: -1.5 Ωar


2030 Extreme Rainfall Events Projection Summary

Current 1-in-20-year daily rainfall

amount to increase by approx. 9 mm

3% increase in annual rainfall

Confidence level is high

2090 Extreme Rainfall Events Projection Summary

Rainfall to increase by approx. 43 mm

Current 1-in-20-year daily rainfall event will

become a 1-in-4 year event

6% increase in annual rainfall

Confidence level is high

99


7.4.5 Summary of ecosystem service vulnerability to climate change

Under future climate change scenarios, Solomon Islands is likely to face rising sea levels, increasing

air and sea temperatures and an increase in extreme rainfall events. It is anticipated that these

changes will put further stress on marine resources by increasing bleaching events and the death of

corals, molluscs and crustaceans from ocean acidification. Based on the vulnerability assessment to

climate threats, Table 7-1 summarises the national ecosystem services that are predicted to have

high (ticked) to very high (ticked and shaded) vulnerability to various climate change variables for

2030 and 2090.

The key findings from the results of this assessment are outlined below.

As climate change threats intensify over time, ecosystems may become more vulnerable, which

correlates to the increased number of climate variables listed for 2090 in Table 7-1.

The key climate change threat to national ecosystems and their services for 2030 is sea-level

rise. Many of the ecosystem services vulnerable to this threat are critical provisioning services

related to water supply (groundwater, lakes, rivers and streams) and food source (seaweed,

aquaculture)

By 2090, a high proportion of national ecosystem services could be highly vulnerable to sea-level

rise, increased temperatures and ocean acidification.

A 2-4°C temperature increase by 2090 is a potential threat to a broad range of national services

across marine, coastal and terrestrial ecosystems, where:

○ marine ecosystems are anticipated to be vulnerable to the projected temperature increase due

to coral reef, lagoon and macroalgae having high sensitivity and low capacity to adapt to

temperature changes. Local communities that rely upon these ecosystems for essential

services (such as food, income and raw materials) are likely to be required to adapt to

alternative ecosystems for these provisional services; and

○ aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems will be moderately vulnerable to the projected temperature

change, which may be expressed by changes in local biodiversity and sensitivity to other

threats such as pest and disease. Adaptive land management practices may address these

threats,

Based on current projections, coral reefs and their services will be particularly vulnerable to 2090

ocean acidification levels, where aragonite concentrations may decline to values where coral

reefs have not historically been found. Intertidal ecosystems providing food, such as crustaceans

and molluscs, may also be vulnerable. Local communities that rely on these ecosystems for

essential services (such as food, income and raw materials) will be required to adapt to alternative

ecosystems for provisional services by 2090.

The effects of extreme rainfall events by 2090 may affect soil stability and the water quality of

receiving environments. Improving land management practices and reforestation within

catchments may help reduce these threats.

100


Table 7-1 Climate variables and the high to very highly vulnerable ecosystem services at the national scale

2030* 2090

Ecosystem Ecosystem Services Sea Level Rise

Extreme Rainfall Events

Sea Level Rise

Increased Sea Temp

Extreme Rainfall

Extreme Air Temp

Annual Air Temp

Ocean Acidific-ation

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaweeds)

Habitat provision

Income generation (seaweed)

Kastom medicine and food


Seabed stabilisation

Wetlands, lakes and swamps

Cultural values (heritage)

Food provision

Habitat provision

Support aquaculture

Water provision (drinking, domestic)

Water quality and flood flow regulation

Coral reefs Coastal protection

Cultural values (shells, ornaments)

Fishing grounds

Food provision

Habitat provision / biodiversity

Income and revenue source

Kastom medicine

Lime extraction

Raw materials provision (coral rock)


Supports marine food chain


2030* 2090

Supports tourism industry

Groundwater Income generation (spring water)

Water provision

Coastline and beaches

Fauna habitat (e.g. turtle nesting)

Rivers and streams

Water supply (drinking and domestic)

Water supply (irrigation)

Food provision


Support fisheries

Ocean/sea Climate and atmospheric regulation

Food provision

Habitat provision

Income and revenue generation

Mangroves Carbon sequestration

Coastal protection, shoreline stabilisation

Food provision

Kastom medicine


* Based on the 2030 projections, ecosystem services are likely to be highly vulnerable to sea-level rise and an increase in extreme rainfall events and be low to moderately

vulnerable to an increase in sea and air temperature and ocean acidification.


8 ESRAM outcomes

The vulnerability of social and ecological systems to human activities such as logging, agriculture,

pollution and the over-exploitation of marine resources is increasing. As one of the fastest growing

populations in the world, these activities will only intensify and have an increased detrimental effect

on the communities and economies of Solomon Islands. The direct and indirect effects of climate

change and their interactions with human-induced threats increases the vulnerability of critical

ecosystems and ecosystem services. By highlighting these vulnerabilities, opportunities to protect

and restore critical ecosystems and their services can be identified to retain and build on the

strengths of social systems and effective governance structures and ultimately increase the

resilience of both people and ecosystems.

The following section provides a summary of the vulnerabilities of Honiara’s ecosystem services to

climate and non-climate related threats and their effect on the resilience of the communities and

economies of Solomon Islands. Due to the linked, interconnectedness of the social ecological

systems and climate and non-climate threats, and the high-level nature of the national scale study,

ESRAM outcomes are presented in three broad ecosystem types: freshwater (groundwater,

wetlands, swamps, lakes, rivers, and streams), coastal and marine (beaches, mangroves, coral

reefs, estuaries, seagrass and marine macroalgae, and ocean) and terrestrial (forests and cultivated

land).

8.1 Resilience of ecosystem services to human induced and climate change effects

8.1.1 Freshwater ecosystems and services

Increasing erosion and sedimentation of stream and river systems from logging operations,

subsistence cultivation on sloping lands, and land clearing for commercial and residential purposes

is affecting the water quality of freshwater systems. In addition to sediment run-off, pollution in water

catchments from inappropriate solid waste and sanitation practices, and chemical, pesticide and

fertiliser inputs is increasing with rapid population growth, urbanisation and extractive industries. The

projected increase in extreme rainfall events is likely to increase pollution inputs in the upper

catchment areas, which then have detrimental flow-on effects to lower catchments.

The effects of extreme rainfall events by 2030 and beyond is likely to worsen soil stability and the

water quality of receiving environments. Ecosystem services most likely to be vulnerable to these

threats are critical provisioning services provided by freshwater ecosystems (i.e. rivers and streams)

such as water supply (for drinking, domestic and irrigation purposes), food provision for both

subsistence and commercial purposes (eels and other fish, molluscs, crustaceans, etc.), habitat

provision (supporting biodiversity and food sources) and recreational activities (e.g. swimming).

Communities and economies that rely on these ecosystems for essential services (such as food,

income and raw materials) may be required to adapt to alternative ecosystems for provisional

services.

The effect on freshwater systems such as groundwater, wetlands, swamps, lakes, rivers and streams

will be further intensified by the threat of saltwater intrusion from rising sea levels due to ecosystems


having high sensitivity and low capacity to adapt to increased salinity levels. Many of the ecosystem

services vulnerable to sea-level rise are critical provisioning services related to water supply

(groundwater and lakes) and food source (aquaculture), income generation (bottled spring water),

habitat provision and biodiversity, and regulating services such as water purification. The high

vulnerability of water supply and food provisioning services to both human-induced and climate

change effects severely reduces the resilience of communities, particularly in times following natural

or climate-related disasters.

The potential economic loss of freshwater ecosystems (e.g. freshwater lakes, rivers, wetlands) is

estimated to cost USD 15,512 (2015) or SBD 121,282 (2015) per hectare per annum.

8.1.2 Coastal and marine ecosystems and services

Increasing habitat destruction, pollution and over-exploitation of marine resources for both

subsistence and commercial use has resulted in severe decline of marine biodiversity and ocean

health, and the depletion of important food and commercial species. An increasing population and

inadequate environmental regulations are intensifying the rate of degradation.

The projected 2-4°C sea temperature increase by 2090 will further intensify these threats and

increase the risk of coral bleaching. Marine ecosystems are likely to be highly vulnerable to the

projected temperature increase due to coral reefs and lagoons having high sensitivity and low

capacity to adapt to changes in sea temperature. An increase in sea temperature of this magnitude,

coupled with coral bleaching and the over-exploitation and pollution, is likely to result in all regulating

and many provisioning ecosystem services provided by marine ecosystems becoming highly

vulnerable to these changes. Marine regulating ecosystem services assessed in this study that are

likely to be most vulnerable include: marine primary productivity (reefs are critical to coastal food

chain), climate and atmosphere regulation, and carbon sequestration. All ecosystems play a vital

role in cycling and storing carbon for climate regulation, but the carbon dioxide exchange of oceans

is larger than that of terrestrial ecosystems (Carabine et al. 2015).

The provisioning services identified as vulnerable to the projected sea temperature rise are extensive

and many of these services are critical to the well-being and livelihoods of a large proportion of

Solomon Island communities and economies. Provisioning ecosystem services identified as highly

vulnerable include: food provision (supplying daily protein and micronutrients through fish, including

pelagic fish, turtles, octopus, clams, beche-de-mer and trochus); habitat (essential feeding, breeding,

spawning, cleaning and aggregation habitat); biodiversity; income and revenue generation

(commercial extractive enterprises, i.e. fishing, aquarium trade, coral, lime extraction); tourism;

provision of raw materials (coral rock and lime production), and hazard protection (wave attenuation

by coral reefs, and seabed stabilisation by marine macroalgae). Cultural ecosystem services are also

threatened by temperature changes, particularly those services provided by corals, and include:

cultural practices and values (shell money, ornaments and decorations), cultural identity and status,

and kastom medicine.

Furthermore, the projected levels of ocean acidification and the associated decline in aragonite

concentrations (a metastable form of calcium carbonate used by reef building corals and crustaceans

and molluscs to build skeletons) will further reduce the resilience of coral reefs and all ecosystem

services, particularly by 2090 and beyond, when the median aragonite saturation state may continue


to strongly decline to values where coral reefs have not historically been found (< 3.0). The effect of

acidification on the health of reef and marine ecosystems is likely to be compounded by other

stressors, including coral bleaching, storm damage, water quality and fishing pressure. Intertidal

ecosystems that provide food, such as crustaceans and molluscs, may also be vulnerable, further

reducing the resilience of local communities that rely on these ecosystems for essential services

such as food, income and raw materials. Communities and economies that rely on these ecosystems

for essential services (such as food, income and raw materials) will be required to adapt to alternative

ecosystems for provisional services by 2090.

The projected sea-level rise of 40 to 89 cm by 2090, together with the effects of coastal development,

urbanisation and pollution, are likely to increase the vulnerability of ecosystem services provided by

mangroves and sand beaches from inundation and erosion of coastal habitats. The level of

vulnerability for both ecosystems and their services will, however, largely depend on their location,

adequate expansion space, and local hydrologic and geographic features. Mangrove ecosystem

services likely to be vulnerable to 2090 sea levels include: carbon sequestration, coastal protection

and shoreline stabilisation, food provision, raw material and fuelwood provision, and kastom

medicine. It is estimated between 50% and 71% of the carbon sequestered in oceans (which totals

up to 55% of total sequestration) is captured by coastal vegetation (Nellemann et al. 2009) while the

rates of sequestration and storage by coastal vegetation can be equal or more than the sequestration

rates of tropical rainforests or peatlands (ibid). Beach-dependent species such as marine turtles, are

likely to have a high vulnerability to sea-level rise, given their inability to adapt to nesting outside of

sand dunes. The over-exploitation of marine turtles, their sensitivity to temperature changes and the

increasing pollution of oceans will further increase their vulnerability to rising sea levels.

An increase in extreme rainfall events will also result in an increase of run-off into estuaries, which

influences water residence time, nutrient delivery, vertical stratification and salinity. Changes to these

properties can have significant effects on phytoplankton populations and increase the risk of

eutrophication. Changes in freshwater flow and timing can also affect migration and spawning of

many estuarine and marine fishery species. The increased levels of rainfall events and sea levels,

together with threatening land-based activities, will be critical determining factors of water quality in

coastal and marine ecosystems of Solomon Islands.

Marine and coastal ecosystem services are essential to the livelihoods and well-being of many

Solomon Islanders for both subsistence and income generation purposes. The depletion of marine

resources, and the corresponding reduced generation of income, will affect food security by forcing

people to be more dependent on the market, which can have severe implications due to increasing

prices. The high reliance on resources for subsistence, combined with the depletion of marine

resources, is reducing the resilience of communities and ecosystems, both to future climate change

effects and the high population growth. The degradation of marine resources from both climate and

human-induced impacts is also likely to increase the rural-urban migration, as the provision of food

and income becomes insufficient to meet the basic needs of rural households.

The potential economic loss of marine and coastal ecosystems (e.g. coral reefs, coastal systems,

and coastal wetlands, including mangroves) and all ecosystem services is estimated to cost USD

295,052 (2015) or SBD 2,306,888 (2015) per hectare per annum. Utilising the estimated total

coverage of mangroves in Solomon Islands of 65,000 ha (Sulu et al. 2012), the loss of mangroves


and their ecosystem services is equivalent to an economic loss of USD 579,345,000 (2015) or SBD

4,529,395,000 (2015). Based on the estimated seagrass cover of 10,000 ha (Sulu et al. 2012)

throughout Solomon Islands, the loss of ecosystem services provided by seagrass would equate to

a loss of approximately USD 296,700,000 (2015) and SBD 2,319,750,000 (2015).

8.1.3 Terrestrial ecosystems and services

The greatest threat to terrestrial forests and inhabitant flora and fauna communities in Solomon

Islands is dominated by logging and agriculture activities, while threats from mining and infrastructure

development activities are likely to increase in the future. Rapid population growth and urbanisation

will further increase land-clearing activities. The projected air temperature increase of 2–4°C by 2090

and beyond is likely to further increase the existing vulnerability of forests and cultivated land to these

threatening activities. The increased vulnerability of terrestrial ecosystems may be expressed by a

reduction in local biodiversity and species structure, and sensitivity to other threats, such as pests

and disease and prolonged dry periods.

Climate, water and soil regulation provide suitable conditions for cultivated lands for food production

and quality. Land-use change affects the levels of these regulating services, while the interaction of

land-clearing and climate change is predicted to affect the provision of stable climatic conditions

(Carabine et al. 2015) and threaten food security and livelihoods at a national scale.

The clearing of forests will continue to reduce the resilience of social and ecological systems by

reducing the provision of essential ecosystem services. Ecosystem services identified in this study

likely to be highly vulnerable include: provisioning services, such as food (hunting grounds, nuts,

traditional fruits and vegetables); water supply (produced by forests and mountains and supported

by vegetation, soils and microorganisms); habitat and biodiversity; raw materials and income

generation (building, fuel and commercial purposes); and cultural services, such as cultural items,

values, practices, identity and heritage (traditional tools, ornaments, costumes, weaving, handicrafts

and traditional currency). Irreplaceable regulating services of forests are also vulnerable to climate

and non-climate threats. Deforestation has the potential to reduce the capacity of terrestrial

ecosystems to regulate and provide freshwater. The clearing of large forested areas can affect

microclimates and vapour formation and rainfall patterns (Gordon 2003). Regulating services likely

to be highly vulnerable to human-induced and climate change effects include: primary productivity,

nutrient cycling, soil fertility and stability, and carbon sequestration.

A critical ecosystem service provided by terrestrial forests is the mitigation of natural hazards and

extreme weather events. Terrestrial forests act as a barrier or buffer to extreme events and natural

hazards by protecting people in downstream areas from landslides and flash floods, and reduce the

level of sediment run-off into rivers and streams. Forest degradation, clearing and change in land

use reduces the resilience of both humans and ecosystems to natural hazards. As the frequency and

intensity of climate-related disasters increase with global climate change (Munang et al. 2013), the

resilience of ecosystems and human societies against the effects of climate change will continue to

decrease with further environmental degradation.

The potential economic loss of terrestrial ecosystems (e.g. tropical forests and grasslands) and their

ecosystems is estimated to cost USD 4,675 (2015) or SBD 36,553 (2015) per hectare per annum.


Based on the estimated forest cover of 2,150,000 ha in 2015, this would equate to a loss of

approximately USD 6,884,300,000 (2015) and SBD 53,829,550,000 (2015).

8.2 National ecosystem based adaptation options

Well managed and healthy ecosystems provide essential services for the health, well-being and

livelihoods of the people of Solomon Islands. The ESRAM process has identified the vulnerabilities

of social ecological systems to climate and non‐climate change threats and impacts. By

strengthening and assisting ecosystems to adapt to future threats, the resilience of local communities

and national and sub-national economies is increased.

There is a strong economic case for investing in ecosystem services for human benefits, and most

studies discover that the costs of ecosystem restoration and protection are far outweighed by the

benefits (Carabine et al. 2015). Political support at the national level is critical for mainstreaming

ecosystem-based adaptation to respond and act to future climate change impacts and climate-

related disasters. Strong governance and well-coordinated regulations between jurisdictions of

management is needed at all levels of government, together with awareness among communities

about the values, restoration, protection and sustainable management of ecosystem services.

Based on the vulnerable ecosystem services outlined above, Table 8-1 presents high level EbA

options to be considered in the protection, restoration and strengthening of ecosystems to increase

the resilience of Solomon Island social and ecological systems.


Table 8-1 Suggested EbA options to increase the adaptive capacity and resilience of Solomon Island ecosystems

High Level Ecosystem Type

Most Vulnerable Ecosystem Services to Climate and Non-climate Effects

Anthropogenic and Non-Climate Stressors

Potential Climate Change Related Impact

Adaptation and Ecosystem Resilience Options

Key Stakeholders to Support EbA Option Implementation

Fresh water Water supply (drinking, domestic, irrigation)

Habitat and biodiversity

Food provision (aquaculture)

Income generation

Recreational activities (swimming)

Population growth

Vegetation clearing and land disturbance

Sediment run-off from inappropriate land management activities such as logging and agriculture

Pollution from poor solid waste management and sanitation, chemical, pesticides and fertiliser inputs, urbanisation and extractive industries

Soil erosion, sedimentation and landslip from extreme rainfall events. Exacerbated by more intense tropical cyclones.

Salt water intrusion from sea-level rise

Relocate communities and businesses from vulnerable riparian areas to drier, higher ground

Rezone areas within 50 m of a waterway to exclude development

Environmental compliance training for government staff

Vegetation protection and catchment and riparian revegetation programme

Land-use planning restrictions on steep and unstable soils

Nationwide environmental awareness and education programmes on:

- Sustainable land management practices, including importance of riparian vegetation

- Stormwater management systems

- Good waste management and sanitation practices


Ministry of Forests and Research

Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development

Ministry of Women, Children and Youth

Solomon Islands Water Authority

Town and Country Planning Board


Botanical Garden and National Herbarium

Solo Enviro Beautification

The Nature Conservancy

World Wildlife Fund

SPREP

Coastal and marine

Food provision (fish, including pelagic fish, turtles, octopus, clams, beche-de-mer and trochus)

Habitat (essential feeding, breeding, spawning, cleaning and aggregation habitat) and biodiversity

Population growth

Depletion of marine resources and loss of biodiversity from over-exploitation (over-fishing)

Sediment run-off from inappropriate land management activities

Decline in reef ecosystem condition and coral dieback due to coral bleaching (rising temperature), ocean acidification, poor water quality (sedimentation due to extreme rainfall events)

Exacerbated by more intense tropical cyclones.

Designate national marine and reef protection areas

Relocate communities and businesses from vulnerable coastal areas further inland or to higher ground

Sustainable fisheries management



Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources









Income generation (commercial extractive enterprises and tourism)

Provision of raw materials (coral rock and lime production)

Hazard protection (wave attenuation by coral reefs, shoreline stabilisation by mangroves, and sea-bed stabilisation by marine macroalgae).

Cultural practices and values (shell money, ornaments and decorations)

Cultural identity and status

Kastom medicine

Marine primary productivity

Climate and atmosphere regulation


such as logging and agriculture

Pollution from poor solid waste management and sanitation, chemical, pesticide and fertiliser inputs, urbanisation and extractive industries

Coastal development and vegetation clearing

Shift in marine ecosystem structure due to rise in sea temperature

Altered capacity for oceans to regulate climate from increased sea temperatures

Sediment run-off from extreme rainfall events

Coastal erosion of mangroves forests and sand beaches from sea-level rise, storm surge and tropical cyclones

Permanent saltwater inundation of mangrove areas

Coastal vegetation protection and revegetation

Land-use planning restrictions on coastal fringe

Nationwide environmental awareness and education programmes on the value of coral reefs for ecosystem services and sustainable fishing









World Wildlife Fund

SPREP

Terrestrial Provision of food (hunting grounds, nuts, fruits and vegetables)

Water supply (produced by forests and mountains)

Habitat and biodiversity

Raw materials and income generation (building, fuel and commercial purposes)

Cultural items (traditional tools, ornaments, costumes, weaving, handicrafts and traditional currency)

Cultural values and practices

Population growth

Depletion of forests and loss of biodiversity from clearing and development

Change of land use

Sediment run-off from inappropriate land management activities such as logging and agriculture

Soil degradation from chemical, pesticide and

Soil erosion, sedimentation and landslip from extreme rainfall events. Exacerbated by more intense tropical cyclones.

Increase in invasive species due to increase in temperature and extreme rainfall events

Designate national protected areas

National food security programme


Vegetation protection and catchment and riparian revegetation programme

Nationwide education programme on the value of terrestrial watersheds and sustainable land management practices

Land-use planning restrictions on steep and unstable soils


Ministry of Forests and Research












Cultural identity and heritage

Water purification


Nutrient cycling

Soil fertility


Natural hazard protection

fertiliser inputs, and extractive industries





World Wildlife Fund

SPREP


Glossary

Adaptation Changes made in order to reduce the vulnerability of a community, society or system to the negative effects of climate change

Adaptive capacity The ability of an ecosystem service to adjust to climate change, to moderate potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences

Biodiversity The variability among living organisms from all sources, including terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems (CBD)

Climate change Changes in the Earth’s climate, due to human activities (anthropogenic climate change) or natural processes, which are already occurring or predicted to occur. Anthropogenic climate change is expected to happen much more rapidly than natural changes in the climate, posing an enormous challenge to both natural and human systems.

Ecosystem A complex set of relationships of living organisms functioning as a unit and interacting with their physical environment

Ecosystem-based adaptation

Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) is an ecosystems focussed approach to building the resilience of human communities to the negative effects of climate change.

Ecosystem services The benefits that an ecosystem provides to humans

Exposure The degree to which an ecosystem service is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate-related stimuli. The effect may be direct (e.g. coral bleaching in response to temperature rise) or indirect (e.g. seagrass dieback due to sedimentation from extreme rainfall events).

Resilience The capacity of a community, society or natural system to maintain its structure and functioning through stress or change. The combination of resistance and recovery time influence the degree to which a system experiences long-term consequences of a stressor’s impact (Folke 2006).

Risk The potential for consequences where something of value is at stake and where the outcome is uncertain. (Probability of physical event occurring x Consequences).

Sensitivity The degree to which an ecosystem service is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate-related stimuli. The effect may be direct (e.g. coral bleaching in response to temperature rise) or indirect (e.g. seagrass dieback due to sedimentation from extreme rainfall events).

Vulnerability The degree to which exposed elements, such as human beings, their livelihoods and their assets, are susceptible and unable to cope with the adverse impacts of natural and climate change hazard events.


9 References and Bibliography

9.1 References

Abernethy, K., Bodin, O., Olsson, P., Hilly, Z., Schwarz, A. (2014) Two steps forward, two steps back:

the role of innovation in transforming towards community-based marine resource management in

Solomon Islands. Global Environmental Change 28: 309-321.

Aswani, S., Albert, S. (2015) Change in Roviana Lagoon Coral Reef Ethnobiology. In: Ethnobiology

of Corals and Coral Reefs, Springer, Switzerland.

Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2011). Climate Change in the Pacific: Scientific

Assessment and New Research, Volume 2: Country Reports, Pacific Climate Change Science

Program, Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation (CSIRO), Melbourne, Australia 273 pp

Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2012). Pacific Climate Change Science Program, End

of Program Report July 2009 – December 2011. Australian Bureau of Meteorology and

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Melbourne,

http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/wp-

content/uploads/2013/06/PCCSP_EofProgram_Report.pdf)

Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2014). Climate Variability, Extremes and Change in

the Western Tropical Pacific: New Science and Updated Country Reports, Pacific Australia Climate

Change Science and Adaptation Planning Program, Australian Bureau of Meteorology and

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Melbourne, Australia 358

pp http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/publications/reports/climatevariability-extremes-

and-change-in-the-western-tropical-pacific-2014/

Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2014). Climate Variability, Extremes and Change in

the Western Tropical Pacific: New Science and Updated Country Reports. Pacific-Australia Climate

Change Science and Adaptation Planning Program Technical Report, Australian Bureau of

Meteorology and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Melbourne,

Australia.

Berkelmans, R., De’ath, G., Kininmouth., S., and Skirving, W.J. (2004). A comparison of the 1998

and 2002 coral bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef: spatial correlation, patterns and

predications. Coral Reefs, 23, 74-83.

BirdLife International (2017). ‘What are KBAs and how are they identified?’ Accessed 24 May 2017

at: http://www.keybiodiversityareas.org/what-are-kbas

Biggs, R., Schluter, M., and Schoon, M.L (2015). Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining

Ecosystem Services in Social–Ecological Systems. Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-08265-6

Bourke, RM., McGregor, A., Allen, MG., Evans, BR., Mullen, BF., Pollard, AA., Wairiu, M and Zotalis,

S (2006). Solomon Islands Smallholder Agriculture Study, vol. 1, 5, Commonwealth of Australia,

Canberra.

http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/PCCSP_EofProgram_Report.pdf


http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/publications/reports/climatevariability-extremes-and-change-in-the-western-tropical-pacific-2014/

http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/publications/reports/climatevariability-extremes-and-change-in-the-western-tropical-pacific-2014/

http://www.keybiodiversityareas.org/what-are-kbas


Butler, R. (no year). Solomon Islands Forest Information and Data. Accessed 27 March 2017 at:

http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/2000/Solomon_Islands.htm

CBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity) (2012). COP 11 Decision XI/17. Marine

and coastal biodiversity: ecologically or biologically significant marine areas. Accessed from:

http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/default.shtml?id=13178

CBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity) (2009). Connecting Biodiversity and

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Report of the Second Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group

on Biodiversity and Climate Change. Montreal, Technical Series No. 41, 126 pages.

Chin, A., Lison De Loma, T., Reytar, K., Planes, S., Gerhardt, K., Clua, E., Burke, L. and Wilkinson,

C. (2011) Status of Coral Reefs of the Pacific and Outlook: 2011. Global Coral Reef Monitoring

Network.

Donner, S.D., Skirving, W.J., Little, C.M., Oppenheimer, M., and Hoegh-Guldberg, O. (2005). Global

assessment of coral bleaching and required rates of adaptation under climate change. Glob. Change

Biol., 11, 2251-2265.

Groot, R. de, Brander, L., Ploeg, S. van der, Costanza, R., Bernard, F., Braat, L., Christie, M.,

Crossman, N., Ghermandi, A., Hein, L.G., Hussain, S., Kumar, P., McVittie, A., Portela, R.,

Rodriguez, L.C., Brink, P., Beukering, P., van (2012) Global estimates of the value of ecosystems

and their services in monetary units. Ecosystem Services 1 ISSN 2212-0416 p.50-61.

FAO (2011) Payments for ecosystem services and food security. Food and Agriculture Organisation

of the United Nations: Rome, Italy.

Filardi, C., Boseto, D., Filardi, C. (2007) A preliminary desk study identifying important bird areas

(IBAs) in the Solomon Islands. Birdlife International.

Folke, C. (2006) Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses.

Global Environmental Change Volume 16, Issue 3, 2006, p. 253–267.

Frazer, I. (1997) The struggle for control of Solomon Islands’ forests. The Contemporary Pacific, 9,

1. pp. 39–72.

Furusawa, T., Sirikolo, M., Sasaoka, M., Ohtsuka, R. (2014) Interaction between forest biodiversity

and people’s use of forest resources in Roviana, Solomon Islands: implications for biocultural

conservation under socio-economic changes. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 10: 10-

20.

Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) (2012) The Solomon Islands Climate Assistance

Programme. Accessed 29 May 2017 at: http://www.gcca.eu/national-programmes/pacific/gcca-

solomon-islands-climate-assistance-programme

Gordon, L. (2003) Land use, freshwater flows and ecosystem services in an era of global change.

Doctoral Thesis. Stockholm University: Stockholm, Sweden.

Green, A., Lokani, P., Atu, W., Ramohia, P., Thomas, P., Almany, J. (eds.) (2006) Solomon Islands

Marine Assessment: Technical report of a survey conducted May 13 to June 17, 2004. The Nature

Conservancy – Pacific Island Countries, Report No. 1/06.

http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/2000/Solomon_Islands.htm

http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/default.shtml?id=13178

http://www.gcca.eu/national-programmes/pacific/gcca-solomon-islands-climate-assistance-programme

http://www.gcca.eu/national-programmes/pacific/gcca-solomon-islands-climate-assistance-programme


Guinotte, J.M., Buddemeier, R., W. and Kleypas, J.A., (2003). Future coral reef habitat marginality:

temporal and spatial effects of climate change in the Pacific basin. Coral Reefs, 22, 551-558

Gunderson, L. H., and Holling, C. S. eds. (2002) Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in

Systems of Humans and Nature. Island Press, Washington DC.Hallock, P., (2005): Global change

and modern coral reefs: new opportunities to understand shallow water-carbonate depositional

processes. Sediment. Geol., 175, 19-33.

Halpern, B.S., Selkoe, K., White, C., Albert, S., Aswani, S., Lauer, M. (2013) Marine protected areas

and resilience to sedimentation in Solomon Islands. Coral Reefs 32:61-69.

Hoegh-Guldberg, O., 1999. Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs.

Mar. Freshwater Res., 50, 839-866

Holling, C. S. (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:1-23.

IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working

Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change., M.L

Parry, O.F. Canziani. J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge, UK, 976pp.t

Kabutaulaka, T., (2000) Rumble in the Jungle: land, culture and (un)sustainable logging Solomon

Islands. Hooper, A. (ed.). Culture and Sustainable Development in the Pacific. Canberra: 88-97.

Kabutaulaka, T., (2006) Global Capital and Local Ownership in Solomon Islands’ Forestry Industry.

Stewart F. (ed.). Globalisation and governance in the Pacific Islands. State, society and governance

in Melanesia. Studies in State and Society in the Pacific, No. 1. Canberra pp. 239-257.

Kareiva, P.M., 2012. Natural capital: theory and practice of mapping ecosystem services. Oxford

[u.a.]: Oxford Univ. Press, 2012.

King, D.M., Mazzotta, M.J. (2000) Ecosystem Valuations. Published by US Department of Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric

Administration. Accessed 22 May 2017 at: http://www.ecosystemvaluation.org/big_picture.htm

Lomas, M.W., Gilbert, P.M., Shiah, F., and Smith, E.M., (2202). Microbial process and temperature

in Chesapeake Bay: Current relationships and potential impacts of regional warming. Glob. Change

Biol., 8, 51-70.

Mackay, E. (1988) Report on Farming Systems Survey in Solomon Islands. Unpublished report.

MAL, Honiara.

Mataki, M., Solo, G., Donohoe, P., Alele, D., Sikajajaka, L. (2013) Choiseul Province Climate Change

Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment Report. Prepared for Secretariat of the Pacific Community

(SPC), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and Secretariat of the Pacific

Regional Environment Programme (SPREP).

Mataki, M (2011) Solomon Islands National Assessment Report RIO + 20.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island

Press, Washington, DC.

http://www.ecosystemvaluation.org/big_picture.htm


Ministry of Forests, Environment and Conservation (MFEC) (1995). Solomon Islands National Forest

Resources Inventory. The Forests of the Solomon Islands: Volume Six: Western Province, Honiara,

Guadalcanal Island, the Solomon Islands

Montgomery, P. (1995) Forestry in Solomon Islands. Pacific Economic Bulletin, 10, 2. pp. 74–6.

Moseby, K., Labere, J., Read, J. (2012) Landowner surveys inform protected area management: a

case study from Tetepare Island, Solomon Islands. Hum Ecol 4):227-235.

National Statistical Office (2009) Population and Housing Census – Report on Economic Activity and

Labour Force. Solomon Islands National Statistical Office, Ministry of Finance and Treasury, Honiara.

Nellemann, C., Corcoran, E., Duarte, C., Valdes, L., De Young, C., Fonseca, L. and Grimsditch, G.

(2009) Blue carbon: a rapid response assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, GRID-

Arendal.

Pacific Horizon Group (2008) Solomon Islands State of Environment Report 2008. Prepared for the

Solomon islands Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Meteorology by Pacific Horizon

Consultancy Group, Honiara.

Pauku, R., Lapo, W, (2009) National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for Solomon Islands.

Solomon Islands Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Meteorology, Honiara.

Pauku, R., (2009) Solomon Islands Forestry Outlook Study. Food and Agriculture Organization of

the United Nations Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok.

PIPAP (2016) Pacific Islands Protected Areas Portal. Interactive online database, accessed:

November 2016. www.pipap.sprep.org

Resilience Alliance (2017) Resilience. Accessed: 19 May 2017 at:

http://www.resalliance.org/resilience

Rodil, A., Mias-Cea, M. (2014) Cities and Climate Change Initiative, Honiara, Solomon Islands,

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-

Habitat)

Roughan, P. and Wara, S. (2010) Solomon Islands Country Report for the 5‐Year Review of the

Mauritius Strategy for Further Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for Sustainable

Devlopment of SIDS (MSI+5). Prepared by Paul Roughan (PHCG Ltd) and Sammy Wara (Ministry

of Development Planning and Aid Coordination).

Sabetian A. and Afzal, D. (2004) Status of Coral Reefs in the Solomon Islands. In: Sulu R (ed) Status

of Coral Reefs in the Southwest Pacific: 2004. p. 1-81. Suva, Fiji, IPS Publications, University of the

South Pacific 2007 ISBN 978- 982-02-0386-0.

Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S., Foley, J. A., Folke, C., Walker, B. (2001) Catastrophic shifts in

ecosystems. Nature 413:591-596.

Sheppard, C.R.C., Dixon, D.J., Gourlay, M., Sheppard, A., and Payet., R. (2005). Coral mortality

increases wav energy reaching shores protected by ref flats: examples from the Seychelles. Estuar.

Coast Shelf S. , 64, 223-234.

http://www.pipap.sprep.org/

http://www.resalliance.org/resilience


Short, F.T. and Neckles, H.A., (1999). The effects of global change on seagrasses. Aquat. Bot., 63,

169-196.

SPC (Secretariat of the Pacific Community) 2008. Solomon Islands Country Profile, October 2008.

Prepared by SPC Strategic Engagement, Policy and Planning Facility.

SPREP (Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme) 2016. State of conservation in

Solomon Islands – Country Report 2013. Prepared by SPREP.

Sulu, R.J., Boso, D.N., Vave-Karamui, A., Mauli, S., Wini-SimeonState, L. (2012) State of the Coral

Reefs of Solomon Islands Coral Triangle Marine Resources: their Status, Economies, and

Management.

TEEBcase (2012) Benefits of Forest Certification, Solomon Islands. Written by Padma N. Lal, for The

Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity.

Travers, A., Elrick, C., Kay, R., Vestergaard, O. (2012) Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Guidance –

Moving From Principles To Practice. UNEP Working Document, April 2012. Prepared on behalf of

the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

UN-Habitat (2012) Solomon Islands country profile. http://unhabitat.org/solomon-islands/ Accessed

online 3 September 2016.

UNISDR (2009) Global Assessment Report 2009. Accessed 27 May 2017 at:

http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2009/?pid:34andpih:2

van Vuuren, D.P., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M. et al. Climatic Change (2011) 109: 5.

Walker, B., C. S. Holling, S. R. Carpenter, and Kinzig, A. (2004) Adaptability and Transformability in

Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society 9:5.

9.2 Bibliography

Albert, S., Udy, J. and Tibbetts, I. (2008) Responses of algal communities to gradients in herbivore

biomass and water quality in Marovo Lagoon, Solomon Islands. Coral Reefs. 27:73-82.

Albert, S., Udy, J., Tibbetts, I. (2013) Solomon Islands Marine Life – information on biology and

management of marine resources. The University of Queensland, Brisbane.

BMT WBM (2014) Integrated Climate Change Risk and Adaptation Assessment to Inform Settlement

Planning in Choiseul Bay, Solomon Islands Hazards Assessment. Prepared for the Australian

Government Department of Environment by BMYT WBM, Brisbane.

Boseto, D., Morrison, C., Pikacha, P., Pitakia, T. (2007) Biodiversity and conservation of freshwater

fishes in selected rivers on Choiseul Island, Solomon Islands. The South Pacific Journal of Natural

Science 3: 16-21.

Boseto, D., Sirikolo, M. (2009) A report on the freshwater fishes and other fauna biodiversity of two

proposed protected areas on southwest Choiseul Island, Solomon Islands. Report to World Wide

Fund For Nature, 69pp.

http://unhabitat.org/solomon-islands/

http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2009/?pid:34&pih:2


Boseto, D., Furiness Magnuson, S., Pezold, F. (2016) Population genetic structure of the goby

Stiphodon rutilaureus (Gobiidae) in the New Georgia Group, Solomon Islands. Conservation Biology

22:281-291.

Boseto, D., Furiness Magnuson, S., Pezold, F. (2016) Population genetic structure of the goby

Stiphodon rutilaureus (Gobiidae) in the New Georgia Group, Solomon Islands. Conservation Biology

22:281-291.

Choiseul Province (2008) Choiseul Province Medium Term Development Plan, 2009-2011. Choiseul

Provincial Government, Solomon Islands.

Envi-Green Pacific (2012) Proposed project for Solomon Bauxite Limited (SBL) – Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA), Final Report. Prepared for Greenpac by Envi-Green Pacific Consultancy

Limited, Fiji.

Envi-Green Pacific (2013) Environmental Impact Statement Supplementary Report: Proposed

Bauxite mining, Vaghena, Choiseul, Solomon. Prepared for Greenpac and Solomon Bauxite Limited

by Envi-Green Pacific Consultancy Limited, Fiji.

Feinberg, R. (2010) Marine resource conservation and prospects for environmental sustainability in

Anuta, Solomon Islands. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 31:41-54.

Flannery, t. (1990) Mammals of the south-west Pacific and Moluccan Islands, Australian Museum /

Reed Books, Chatswood.

Game, E., Lip-sett-Moore, G., Hamilton, R., Perterson, N., Kereseka, J., Atu, W., Watts, M.,

Possingham, H. (2010) Informed opportunism for conservation planning in the Solomon Islands.

Conservation Letters 4:38-46.

Golder Associates (2014) Jejevo/Isabel B Project Environmental and Social Impact Assessment –

Volume 3, Ecology Appendix B: Terrestrial Baseline Ecology Report. Prepared for Sumitomo Metal

Mining, Solomon Islands Nickel Project.

Govan, H., Maeda, T., Warakohia, D., Atitete, T., Boso, D., Masu, R., Orirana, G., Schwarz, A., Vave-

Karamui, A. (2015) From Village to village: local approaches to promoting spread of community

based resource management: Lessons from Mararo Community Based Organisation, East ‘Are’are,

Malaita Province, Solomon Islands. Report to IUCN Oceania Learning Component.

Iacovino, C., Donohoe, P., Carruthers, T., Chape, S. (2013) Ecosystem-based adaptation and

climate change vulnerability for Choiseul Province, Solomon Islands – a Synthesis Report.

Secretariat of the Pacific Rehgional Environemnet Programme (in collaboration with SPC and GIZ),

Apia, Samoa.

Jenkins, A., Boseto, D. (2007) Freshwater fishes of Tetepare Island. Report to Wetlands International

– Oceania. 33pp.

Jenkins, A., Allen, G., Boseto, D. (2008) Lentipes solomonensis, a new species of freshwater goby

(Teleostei: Gobioidei: Sicydiinae) from the Solomon Islands. International Journal of Ichthyology

(aqua) 14(4): 165-174.

Lavery, T., Pikacha, P., Fisher, D. (2016) Solomon Islands Forest Life – information on biology and

management of forest resources. The University of Queensland, Brisbane.


Lipsett-Moore, G., Hamilton, R., Peterson, N., Game, E., Atu, W., Kereseka, J., Pita, J., Ramohia,

P., Siota, C. (2010). Ridges to Reefs Conservation Plan for Choiseul Province, Solomon Islands. The

Nature Conservancy: TNC Pacific Islands Countries Report No. 2/10. 53 pp.

MDPAC (2011) National Development Strategy 2011 to 2020. Ministry of Development Planning and

Aid Coordination, Honiara, Solomon Islands.

Menazza, S., Balasinorwala, T. (2012) Assessing ecosystem services for Lauru Protected Area

Network (LPAN), Choiseul, Solomon Islands. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity,

January 2012 (www. teebweb.org).

Morrison, C., Pikacha, P., Pitakia, T., Boseto, D, (2007) Herpetofauna, community education and

logging on Choiseul Island, Solomon Islands: implications for conservation. Pacific Conservation

Biology 13: 250-58.

Mueller-Dombois, D., Fosberg, R. (1998) Vegetation of the tropical Pacific Islands. New York,

Springer-Verlag. 733 pp.

Pikacha, P. (2008) Distribution, habitat preference and conservation status of the endemic giant rats

Solomys ponceleti and S. salebrosus on Choiseul Island, Solomon Islands. Final Report (Project no.

700305) to BP Conservation Programme. 25pp.

Pikacha, P., Sirikolo, M. (2009) A report on the biodiversity of three proposed protected areas on

southwest Choiseul island, Solomon Islands. Prepared for WWF (Solomon Islands) and Melanesian

Geo (Solomon Islands) by Ecological Solutions Solomon Islands.

Pikacha, P., Sirikolo, M., Boseto, D., Filardi, C. (2012) Ecological observations on Sanford’s sea-

eagle Haliaeetus (leucogaster) sanfordi. Australian Field Ornithology 29: 143-148.

Pollard, E., Brodie, G., Thaman, R., Morrison, C. (2014) The use of herpetofauna and cultural values

to identify priority conservation forests on Malaita, Solomon Islands. Pacific Conservation Biology

20(4): 354-362.

Warren-Rhodes, K., Schwarz, A. M., Boyle, L. N., Albert, J., Agalo, S. S., Warren, R., Bana, A., Paul,

C., Kodosiku, R., Bosma, W., Yee, D., Rönnbäck, P., Crona, B., Duke, N. (2011) Mangrove

ecosystem services and the potential for carbon revenue programmes in Solomon Islands.

Whitmore, T.C. (1969) The Vegetation of the Solomon Islands. Philosophical Transactions of the

Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, Volume 255, Issue 800, pp. 259-270

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment A-1

Appendix A National workshop attendees

National ESRAM Workshop Attendees (9 August 2016, Honiara)

Name Affiliation

Rosemary Apa Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

Steve Likaveke UN-Habitat

Gloria Suluia SI Water Sector Adaptation Project (UNDP)

Reginald Reuban PRRP / Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

Mary Tahu SI National University

Joyce Aburii Youth@Work

May SI Community Resilience to Climate and Disaster Risk Project (CRISP)

Debra Potakana ECD / Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

Junior Pikacha Ecological Solutions SI

Ikuo Tigulu Ecological Solutions SI

Tammy Tabe University of South Pacific

Hudson K Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

Gideon Solo Ministry of Forestry and Research

Nelly K Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

Myknee Sirikolo Ministry of Forestry and Research

Simba Paza Prime Minister’s Office

Winston Lapo Ministry of Infrastructure and Development

Shannon Seeto WWF-Pacific

Matsuko Pelomo Ministry of Development, Planning and Aid Coordination

Nancy Raeka Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

John Leqata Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources

Tia Masolo Ministry of Environment, Climate and Disaster Management

Donald Kudu DREGAR Consulting

Fred Patison SPREP

Simon Albert University of Queensland

Beth Toki BMT WBM

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment B-1

Appendix B Climate projections

The Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (AR5 2013)

provides projections of future changes in the climate system. These projections use a hierarchy of

global climate models based on a set of four greenhouse gas concentration trajectories, called

representative concentration pathways (RCPs). In combination, the RCPs represent a range of 21st

century climate policies.

The RCPs are labelled according to the range of radiative forcing values in the year 2100 relative to

pre-industrial values:

RCP 2.6 applies a radiative forcing value of +2.6 W/m2 and represents a low forcing level.

RCP 4.5 and RCP 6 apply radiative forcing values of +4.5 and +6.0 W/m2 and represent

stabilisation scenarios.

RCP 8.5 applies a radiative forcing value +8.5 W/m2 and represents a high forcing level.

Figure B-1 Projected emissions of greenhouse gases for the range of RCP trajectories. Radiative forcings for each trajectory shown (bottom right). (van Vuuren et.al. 2011).

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment B-2

The Solomon Islands National Climate Change Policy 2012–2017 (MECDM, 2012) was prepared

prior to the release of the AR5 (IPCC 2013). This policy is based on the projections produced by the

Pacific Climate Change Science Program (PCCSP) using data from the IPCC Fourth Assessment

Report (AR4 2007).

B.1.1 Pacific and country-based projections

The climates of countries within the Pacific region (partners in the PCCSP) are strongly influenced

by one or more of the following features of the climate: the South Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ),

the West Pacific Monsoon (WPM), the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and El Niño-

Southern Oscillation (ENSO) (refer to Figure B-2). There are still major deficiencies in understanding

the properties and impacts of these climate features, despite the fact that they can strongly influence

rainfall, winds, tropical cyclone tracks, ocean currents, nutrients and other aspects of the environment

(BOM and CSIRO 2012).

Figure B-2 The main climate features in the western tropical Pacific region (source: BOM and CSIRO 2012)

Prior to PCCSP, limited information was available regarding projections for the Pacific region.

PCCSP aimed to provide more detailed atmospheric and ocean projections for each Pacific country.

Twenty-four global climate models were evaluated. AR4 climate simulations were compared against

historical observations from participating PCCSP countries, and 18 models were considered suitable

for projections in the Pacific region. Projections were developed for three 20-year periods (centred

on 2030, 2055 and 2090) and three emissions scenarios (low-B1, medium-A1B and high-A2. Further

information on these scenarios is provided in the AR4).


Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment C-1

Appendix C National vulnerability assessment results

Climate Variable

Current Climate

Time Slice and Scenario

Projection

Ecosystem Ecosystem Service

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V E S PI AC V

Rivers, streams Food provision 1 3 3 3 9 2 3 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Rivers, streams Water supply (drinking and domestic) 1 3 3 3 9 2 3 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Rivers, streams Water supply (irrigation) 1 3 3 3 9 2 3 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Rivers, streams Recreation 1 1 1 3 3 2 1 2 3 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 1 6 3 2 6 1 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Rivers, streams Transportation, anchorage 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Rivers, streams Raw materials provision 1 3 3 3 9 2 2 4 3 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Rivers, streams Energy generation (hydropow er) 1 1 1 3 3 2 1 2 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Rivers, streams Cultural values 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 2 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 1 6 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Rivers, streams Waste disposal and dispersal 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Rivers, streams Support f isheries 1 3 3 3 9 2 3 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Rivers, streams Habitat provision, biodiversity 1 3 3 3 9 2 3 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Raw materials and fuel provision 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Fauna habitat 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Kastom medicine provision 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Source of income/revenue 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Carbon sequestration 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Nutrient cycling and primary productivity 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Soil retention and fertility 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Air regulation and shade provision 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Support recreation and tourism 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Cultural values and handicrafts 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Terrestrial Forests, Vegetation Food provision 0 2 0 2 0 1 2 2 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Other terrrestrial land Commercial value (incl. agriculture) 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6

Other terrrestrial land Provides identity and heritage 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3

Other terrrestrial land Support forests 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6

Other terrrestrial land Minerals source (mining industry) 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3

Other terrrestrial land Land provision 0 3 0 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6

Coral Reefs Habitat provision / biodiversity 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Food provision 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Coastal protection 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Income and revenue source 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Fishing grounds 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Lime extraction 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Raw materials provision (coral rock) 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Cultural values (shells, ornaments) 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Recreation and leisure 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Kastom medicine 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Supports tourism industry 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coral Reefs Supports marine food chain 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Coast line / Beach Support recreation/leisure 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Coast line / Beach Waste disposal and dispersal 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Coast line / Beach Domestic use (bathing) 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Coast line / Beach Cultural values and handicrafts 2 1 2 2 4 3 1 3 2 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Coast line / Beach Raw materials provision 2 1 2 2 4 3 1 3 2 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Coast line / Beach Supports transport (boat landing) 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Coast line / Beach Fauna habitat (e.g. turtle nesting) 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Coast line / Beach Coastal protection 2 2 4 2 8 3 2 6 2 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Mangroves Food provision 2 2 4 2 8 3 2 6 2 12 2 2 4 2 8 2 2 4 3 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 2 4 2 8 2 2 4 3 12 3 2 6 2 12 2 3 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 2 3 6 3 18

Mangroves Raw materials and fuel provision 2 3 6 2 12 3 3 9 2 18 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12

Mangroves Fauna habitat 2 2 4 2 8 3 2 6 2 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12

Mangroves Coastal protection, shoreline stabilisation 2 3 6 2 12 3 3 9 2 18 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12

Mangroves Kastom medicine 2 3 6 2 12 3 3 9 2 18 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12

Mangroves Recreation 2 1 2 2 4 3 1 3 2 6 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0

Mangroves Waste disposal and dispersal 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0

Mangroves Cultural values (crafts, dye) 2 2 4 2 8 3 2 6 2 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12

Mangroves Carbon sequestration 2 3 6 2 12 3 3 9 2 18 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12 2 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 12

Sea / Ocean Support transport 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3 0 6 1 12 3 0 0 1 0

Sea / Ocean Habitat provision 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Sea / Ocean Food provision 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Sea / Ocean Climate and atmospheric regulation 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Sea / Ocean Income and revenue generation 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Mountains, Highlands Raw materials provision 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Mountains, Highlands Habitat provision and biodiversity 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Mountains, Highlands Water source 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Mountains, Highlands Climatic regulation 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Mountains, Highlands Provide protection from disasters 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Mountains, Highlands Support navigation 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0

Wetlands / Lakes / Sw amps Food provision 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Wetlands / Lakes / Sw amps Water provision (drinking, domestic) 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Wetlands / Lakes / Sw amps Habitat provision 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Wetlands / Lakes / Sw amps Support aquaculture 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Wetlands / Lakes / Sw amps Cultural values (heritage) 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 2 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Wetlands / Lakes / Sw amps Water quality and f lood f low regulation 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaw eeds)Habitat provision 3 2 6 1 6 3 2 6 1 6 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaw eeds)Primary productivity 3 2 6 1 6 3 2 6 1 6 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaw eeds)Income generation ( seaw eed) 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaw eeds)Kastom medicine and food 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Seagrass and marine macroalgae (seaw eeds)Seabed stabilisation 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 6 2 12 3 2 6 3 18 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27 3 2 6 2 12 3 3 9 3 27

Groundw ater Water provision 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Groundw ater Income generation (spring w ater) 2 3 6 3 18 3 3 9 3 27 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Plantations and Gardens Income generation 2 3 6 1 6 3 3 9 1 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

Plantations and Gardens Food provision 2 3 6 1 6 3 3 9 1 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 6 2 12

- SLR of betw een approx.

7–18cm (very similar values

for different RCPs)

- Mean change: 13cm

- Confidence level is

medium


40–89 cm

- Mean change: 63cm


medium

- Median aragonite

saturation state w ill

continue to strongly decline

thereafter to values w here

coral reefs have not

historically been found (<

3.0).

- Mean change: -1.5 Ωar


medium

- Median aragonite


transition to marginal

conditions (3.5) around

2030.



medium

- Under all RCPs, the

w arming is up to 1.0°C

relative to 1995

- Mean change: 0.7’C

- Confidence level is very

high

- Under all RCP8.5, the

w arming is up to 2 - 4°C

- Mean change: 2.8'C


high

- The current 1-in-20-year

daily rainfall amount is

projected to increase by

approx. 9 mm

- 3% increase in annual

rainfall

- Confidence level for

frequency and intensity of

extreme rainfall events is

high

- Rainfall to increase by

approx. 43 mm

- current 1-in-20-year daily

rainfall event w ill become,

on average, a 1-in-4- year

event


rainfall



2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5

Sea surface temperatures average 27 to 30 deg C. No clear trends in rainfall since mid-1950s w ith

substantial variation in rainfall from year to year. Little

change in extreme daily rainfall over the same period.

70% of Honiara’s annual rainfall occurs in w et season

w ith average monthly rainfall of more than 300 mm. Dry

season monthly average is 100 mm. Santa Cruz

receives more constant rainfall during the year,

averaging 280 mm and 420 mm per month.

2090 RCP8.52030 RCP8.52090 RCP8.52030 RCP8.5 2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5

Ocean acidification

- sea level has risen by about 8 mm per year since 1993

(larger than the global average of 2.8–3.6 mm per year

possibly due to El Nino-Southern Oscillation)

-

Since 18th century level of ocean acidif ication has been

slow ly increasing

SLR Extreme rainfall event Increasing sea temperature


w arming is up to 1.0°C,

relative to 1995



high





high

- Temp on extremely hot

days is projected to

increase by about the same

amount as average temp

- Frequency of extremely

hot days is also expected

to increase.

- Temp of the 1-in-20-year

hot day is projected to

increase by approx. 0.8°C

- Projected hot day temp

increase and frequency is

expected to increase as

per 2030.



increase by approximately

2.9°C


high

Increasing Air Temperature Extreme Air Temperature

Temperatures are relatively constant throughout the

year. Average temperature ranges from 26-27 deg C.

Max temperatures range from 29-31 deg C.

2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5 2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5

Solomon Islands ESRAM: Volume 1 ESRAM Introduction and National Assessment C-1

Climate Variable

Current Climate


Projection


SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0






















































































for different RCPs)

- Mean change: 13cm


medium


40–89 cm

- Mean change: 63cm


medium

- Median aragonite






3.0).



medium

- Median aragonite




2030.



medium



relative to 1995



high





high




approx. 9 mm


rainfall




high


approx. 43 mm




event


rainfall



2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5










Ocean acidification




-


slow ly increasing




relative to 1995



high





high







to increase.







per 2030.




2.9°C


high





2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5 2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5

Climate Variable

Current Climate


Projection


SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

203

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

SLR

209

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

203

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Sea

temp

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

203

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Extr

eme

rainf

all

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

203

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Oce

an

Acid

if icat

ion

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Incr

easi

ng

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

203

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0

Extr

eme

Air

Tem

p

209

0






















































































for different RCPs)

- Mean change: 13cm


medium


40–89 cm

- Mean change: 63cm


medium

- Median aragonite






3.0).



medium

- Median aragonite




2030.



medium



relative to 1995



high





high




approx. 9 mm


rainfall




high


approx. 43 mm




event


rainfall



2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5










Ocean acidification




-


slow ly increasing




relative to 1995



high





high







to increase.







per 2030.




2.9°C


high





2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5 2030 RCP8.5 2090 RCP8.5

C-2

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment ProgrammePO Box 240, Apia, Samoa

+685 21929+685 20231

[email protected]

solomon ecosystem and socio- economic resilience islands ... · solomon islands esram: volume 1...

Documents